Proposed new Channel Tunnel services discussion

[StephenHunter]

Trains can be stopped, and doors opened, mid journey. As has happened with eurostar on the high speed line.

Are there not procedures for that? The Night Ferry had them.

 

[D6130]

A Lille to Geneva service ran for a couple of years in the 2000s.

My wife and I travelled on the direct TGV Lyria service from Lille Europe to Genève in September 2012.... but, IIRC, it was withdrawn shortly afterwards due to disappointing loadings.

 

[TheWierdOne]

They absolutely aren't for a permanent posting

The Geneva custom is very narrow corridor suited for the sporadic controls of nowadays, not for a full permanent control. I wonder how it worked before Schengen.

+ where do you put the french controls as the UK mandates a sealed system?

Given the Swiss managed to work it quite nicely when they weren’t in Schengen and presumably were handling 200-400m TGV trains there isn’t any reason Geneva Cornavin customs couldn’t handle a 200-400m Eurostar.

The usual reason given is that it is rather easier to alight from a Eurostar in the UK before you get to St Pancras than it is to alight an A320 in UK airspace before you get to an airport. And indeed there were examples of the former happening in the early days.

Having border control juxtaposed also means it’s impossible for someone to use Eurostar to claim asylum as they cannot do so without being in the UK, and they can’t pass Eurostar control without entry permits, thus preventing them from being able to claim asylum on arrival.

However as people have mentioned given that airlines have a decent system for managing this it shouldn’t be impossible for Eurostar to somewhat mitigate the need for outstationed border force officers by using a similar, if not identical system to airlines. Given the internet exists it should be possible for Eurostar to check passenger details with the home office and cancel their booking if they don’t possess permission to enter the UK. Passengers can then be given the normal cursory inspection upon arrival. Anyone submitting false info should be caught by Eurostars own checks before boarding, incentivised by fines like airlines.

As far as I know, the Sangatte protocol permits but doesn’t require border controls to be juxtaposed. The requirements come from UK home office.

 

[FinsburyPark]

This does bring the question.

Why do we even need the juxtaposed borders, and can we work without them in the future?

I notice some ferry routes use them and others don't.

In fact, to the best of my knowledge, other than the Dover - Calais and Dover - Dunkerke routes, no one else uses them. Happy to stand corrected.

 

[AlastairFraser]

Is that really the main selling point? I would have thought it’s city centre to city centre without interruption compared to flying. A Geneva London direct rail service could be ~6 hours so a 15 minute wait on arrival isn’t very long cf an arrival from Paris.

You could probably shorten that by an hour, even with a timetabled change at Lille. It's about 3hr13 Geneva to Paris as it is, and a through train would use the Interconnexion Est, so you'd probably do the Geneva to Paris CDG section in about 2hr50, with the CDG to Lille section around 45 mins (non-stop the whole way Geneva-Lille, passengers from Brussels can change at Lille).
Then a 15 min timetabled changeover at Lille, leaving 1hr15 for the Eurostar to get to London (which should be sufficient).

 

[nwales58]

Why do we even need the juxtaposed borders, and can we work without them in the future?.

‘Border facilitation’. Trying to operate the border more smoothly whilst no less secure.

I know the infrastructure side, someone else on this forum might add the HMG/Home Office side.

Actually started with the channel tunnel road shuttles, the Sangatte bilateral defines the framework. My recollection of the thinking at the time was that the cost of each terminal was lower with only one holding zone, outbound, rather than two, with traffic flowing straight out. Folkestone had space constraints.

Eurostar followed a few years later. I recall on-board checks at first, juxtaposed controls were implemented mid-90s. My memory’s no longer 100% reliable though.

Ferries came with the Le Touquet treaty, 2003, which wrapped up the processes, and subsequent amendments. My recollection is that Dover, chronically short of space, was desperate for no inbound holdups (shipping border police across was much cheaper than reclaiming land from the sea). Remember that channel traffic was growing very rapidly from the 90s, single market and just in time supply chains reducing costs.

Had to look up the numbers: Dover in the early 90s handled about 1m lorries a year, by 2005 it was 2m, cars grew rapidly to 3.5m in 1997 then dropped.

I can’t see us giving up juxtaposed controls for the short channel routes (though France might terminate the treaty if our government did something stupid as we need it more than they do). We‘re short of space at all the terminals, Dover, Cheriton or St Pancras. Secure routes to larger terminals are far more expensive. Other routes have much lower flows and more land so don’t need them.

 

[AlbertBeale]

Lausanne is in the Canton of Vaud, and some TGVs definitely work to Lausanne via Geneva. From memory there are couple of (maybe 3) long sidings in the carriage depot just east of Lausanne that can take 400m trains.
I might be wrong but I don't think double sets (400m long) can be serviced in Geneva's carriage depot

I think Lausanne has 7 through platforms (1, 3-8), line 2 is a through freight line. There is also an eighth platform which is a bay. Not sure if you could do passport checks there (the higher numbered platforms are widenings). Geneva (Cornavin) is also an 8 platform station

When I travelled London-Paris-Lausanne-Brig a few years back, the Paris-Lausanne leg of the journey wasn't via Geneva. I'm not sure that stabling/customs options at Lausanne are relevant to the idea of a direct London-Geneva service.

 

[Wolfie]

Whilst I’ve never heard a good reason as to why the UK shouldn’t join Schengen… if we did it would open up all manner of services, with London becoming the natural end of the line for a whole range of services that currently terminate at Brussels or Lille from the south / east / west, eg Strasbourg, Marseille, Montpellier and the Occitane, Bordeaux, Nice, Lyon, Grenoble, Les Alpes, Köln, Frankfurt, Hamburg, Munich, Berlin, and dare I say Milan and Barcelona. It would also enable through services from Manchester / Birmingham to Paris, with the London call being at Stratford.

The quality of border security for the Schengen zone essentially is that of the least effective member.

The pull factors associated with having previously had the largest empire that the world has ever known plus a diaspora resident from most if not all of those countries make the UK very attractive to migrants, both legal and illegal....

 

[Trainbike46]

They absolutely aren't for a permanent posting

The Geneva custom is very narrow corridor suited for the sporadic controls of nowadays, not for a full permanent control. I wonder how it worked before Schengen.

+ where do you put the french controls as the UK mandates a sealed system?

Why on earth would you need French controls? Swiss/Schengen exit (if they so choose), and UK entry should be enough

 

[TheWierdOne]

When I travelled London-Paris-Lausanne-Brig a few years back, the Paris-Lausanne leg of the journey wasn't via Geneva. I'm not sure that stabling/customs options at Lausanne are relevant to the idea of a direct London-Geneva service.

Services between Lausanne and Paris run alternately via Dijon and Geneva

 

[signed]

Why on earth would you need French controls? Swiss/Schengen exit (if they so choose), and UK entry should be enough

You would still need the French customs for France-bound trains, however light the custom checks are, Basel SNCF has some small booths for customs, maybe that's what will be done.

And from #203, that corridor is set to disappear

 

[Trainbike46]

You would still need the French customs for France-bound trains, however light the custom checks are, Basel SNCF has some small booths for customs, maybe that's what will be done.

There is no French customs at Eurostar trains from the Netherlands and Belgium to the UK, despite all running through France. I don't see why that would be different if the origin was in Switzerland

 

[Austriantrain]

But the Geneva market is about 50% larger than Zurich,

Looking at a random June date, both have a very high number of flights from London (all airports), but Zurich seems to have not insignificantly more. Obviously, some of it will be Swiss flights carrying connecting passengers.

and the journey time from Zurich changing at Basle would be stretching things.

For Swiss passengers, certainly not. They are used to it and the market is much larger from Basle.

For Brits, possibly. Although, business travelers apart (where Zurich probably has an edge), I doubt the cities themselves will be the final or sole destinations for most people. Switzerland is much too decentralised for that, as are its tourist attractions.

Be that as it may - Geneva as a destination would certainly be attractive.

 

[stuving]

HS1 had a study done last year into what changes could boost capacity, which said "expanded infrastructure and enhanced border security processes could increase capacity from 1 800 to around 2 400 passengers/h". They are now starting a second one into how to implement this - see this thread for details.

 

[Austriantrain]

HS1 had a study done last year into what changes could boost capacity, which said "expanded infrastructure and enhanced border security processes could increase capacity from 1 800 to around 2 400 passengers/h". They are now starting a second one into how to implement this - see this thread for details.

Which is less then three 374. That does not leave room for expansion.

 

[Trainbike46]

Which is less then three 374. That does not leave room for expansion.

It does, because that would enable aproximately 2x 374 + 1x 373, instead of the current 2x trains, which are a mix of 373s and 374s

And 3x 374s would be possible if they pick up some passengers at the Kent stations

 

[stuving]

Which is less then three 374. That does not leave room for expansion.

I shortened that quote a bit too much, I think; in full it read:

It found that expanded infrastructure and enhanced border security processes could increase capacity from 1 800 to around 2 400 passengers/h in the next three to four years. Redesigning the layout of the international area could see an increase of up to 5 000 passengers/h in the long term.

 

[Trainbike46]

I shortened that quote a bit too much, I think; in full it read:

It found that expanded infrastructure and enhanced border security processes could increase capacity from 1 800 to around 2 400 passengers/h in the next three to four years. Redesigning the layout of the international area could see an increase of up to 5 000 passengers/h in the long term.

or 5.5 374s per hour, or 6.75 373s an hour, both of which is more than the 4-5 paths* an hour currently available through the channel tunnel

*departures from STP at .01, .04, .31, .34 every hour, plus an extra .15 departure in some hours. It may be possible to get more paths if the demand was there, but these 4/5 are the current existing ones

 

[AlbertBeale]

There is no French customs at Eurostar trains from the Netherlands and Belgium to the UK, despite all running through France. I don't see why that would be different if the origin was in Switzerland

Because Switzerland isn't fully part of the EU customs set-up? Switzerland isn't in the EEA.

 

[signed]

There is no French customs at Eurostar trains from the Netherlands and Belgium to the UK, despite all running through France. I don't see why that would be different if the origin was in Switzerland

Switzerland is not part of the EU customs union at all and there is no provision of free movement of goods between the EU and Switzerland.

The status quo now is that circulation is mostly unimpeded and checks are rare, but if either the EU or Switzerland wanted to do compulsory custom controls, they can. Same thing at Basel Bad Bf with Germany or Basel SNCF.

 

[TheWierdOne]

Switzerland is not part of the EU customs union at all and there is no provision of free movement of goods between the EU and Switzerland.

The status quo now is that circulation is mostly unimpeded and checks are rare, but if either the EU or Switzerland wanted to do compulsory custom controls, they can. Same thing at Basel Bad Bf with Germany or Basel SNCF.

I think we can safely discount the Swiss or French causing issues due to customs without an ulterior motive. It’s difficult to imagine there being much in the way of illicit smuggling on the UK-Switzerland route, and the French clearly don’t care that much already given they rarely stop traffic for customs at either border. (Stops at the UK border for immigration reasons are a different matter entirely)

 

[StephenHunter]

It does, because that would enable aproximately 2x 374 + 1x 373, instead of the current 2x trains, which are a mix of 373s and 374s

And 3x 374s would be possible if they pick up some passengers at the Kent stations

Or two "1/2 374s" i.e. an ICE3M or equivalent.

(Technically speaking the 373s and 374s are two units coupled together.

 

[FinsburyPark]

There is no French customs at Eurostar trains from the Netherlands and Belgium to the UK, despite all running through France. I don't see why that would be different if the origin was in Switzerland

To my knowledge any schengen area border gaurd can be used in another countries border.

Anecdotally I've heard that at Spains border with Gibraltar, it has been known that Dutch border personell have manned that border.

Also when Romania and Bulgaria joined Schengen this meant the largest external border in the region is Bulgaria - Turkey. I heard on Euronews that capacity at that border would be expanded and some of the border guards would be from other schengen member states. I have dual nationality with Romania so the moment was a fairly big thing for me

So long as this is true, then another member state can send gaurds to gaurd the borders of a member state.

 

[mad_rich]

HS1 had a study done last year into what changes could boost capacity, which said "expanded infrastructure and enhanced border security processes could increase capacity from 1 800 to around 2 400 passengers/h". They are now starting a second one into how to implement this - see this thread for details.

I believe part of the capacity increase might be moving passengers up to the platforms sooner, thus releasing space in the departure lounge for the next batch.

I guess that requires changes to the turnaround process.

 

[Austriantrain]

It does, because that would enable aproximately 2x 374 + 1x 373, instead of the current 2x trains, which are a mix of 373s and 374s

Only having the ability to have barely three departures an hour is pitiful and not nearly enough to expand the network, especially of competitors really come along to serve the racetrack to Paris (and maybe Amsterdam).

IIRC there used to be 4 to 5 Channel Tunnel paths an hour for HS Services (and apparently Getlink wants to offer more) and that is the number St Pancras must be able to cope with.

 

[ivanhoe]

Can any trains currently heading to Gare du Nord actually be rerouted to Gare de Lyon? . Destinations increase dramatically if that is the case but I’m sure I’m probably thinking ‘too much out of the box’.

 

[stuu]

Can any trains currently heading to Gare du Nord actually be rerouted to Gare de Lyon? . Destinations increase dramatically if that is the case but I’m sure I’m probably thinking ‘too much out of the box’.

Yes, physically, but it's a long way round, and there almost certainly isn't capacity. And you couldn't have the return journey starting there as there are no border facilities. Making onward travel easier would be very much the tail wagging the dog in terms of passenger number as well, most people are going to Paris.

 

[Trainbike46]

Only having the ability to have barely three departures an hour is pitiful and not nearly enough to expand the network, especially of competitors really come along to serve the racetrack to Paris (and maybe Amsterdam).

IIRC there used to be 4 to 5 Channel Tunnel paths an hour for HS Services (and apparently Getlink wants to offer more) and that is the number St Pancras must be able to cope with.

As you may have noticed in my second reply, linked below for ease:

or 5.5 374s per hour, or 6.75 373s an hour, both of which is more than the 4-5 paths* an hour currently available through the channel tunnel

*departures from STP at .01, .04, .31, .34 every hour, plus an extra .15 departure in some hours. It may be possible to get more paths if the demand was there, but these 4/5 are the current existing ones

The longer term plan for St Pancras is for more capacity than all 4/5 paths running with 900 seat-capacity trains. I think it is fair to assume that the competitors are unlikely to start with trains of such a high capacity, so this should be enough for at least 6 trains an hour - so allows for very significant growth long-term, both by Eurostar and potential competitors.

 

[TheWierdOne]

Can any trains currently heading to Gare du Nord actually be rerouted to Gare de Lyon? . Destinations increase dramatically if that is the case but I’m sure I’m probably thinking ‘too much out of the box’.

Yes but at that point you’d be better off just running direct round the LGV Interconnexion Est and stopping at Disneyland or Charles De Gaulle en route to onward destinations

 

[signed]

Can any trains currently heading to Gare du Nord actually be rerouted to Gare de Lyon? . Destinations increase dramatically if that is the case but I’m sure I’m probably thinking ‘too much out of the box’.

You could, but that would be a signalling nightmare + capacity out of Gare de Lyon is already slim