Channel Tunnel capacity constraints?

[387star]

Both le shuttle and eurostar use the same tracks in the tunnel

does this not cause congestion and limitation? Surely Eurostar trains travel much faster

 

[yorksrob]

Having grown up in Kent during the 1990's watching it being built, I took my first trip through the Chunnel for the first time this year !

My impression was that you're down there for a surprisingly long time compared to how I'd always imagined it.

In terms of the mix of traffic, I assume there are enough tracks at Cheriton and Sandgatte to allow a good run up to get to speed before the tunnel.

 

[30907]

Both le shuttle and eurostar use the same tracks in the tunnel

does this not cause congestion and limitation? Surely Eurostar trains travel much faster

Eurostar limited to 160km/h, shuttles 140.

 

[NSE]

I remember reading a very basic explanation for it once. It explained it that Eurotunnel takes up one path, Eurostar takes up half a path and the Eurotunnel freight and 'other' takes up a path and a half. So they went Eurostar, freight, Eurotunnel in that order (this is me really racking my brains here, so happy to be corrected)


It wasn't a technical explanation as you can see haha, but it made it easier for someone with next to no signalling knowledge to understand (like myself).

 

[59CosG95]

I remember reading a very basic explanation for it once. It explained it that Eurotunnel takes up one path, Eurostar takes up half a path and the Eurotunnel freight and 'other' takes up a path and a half. So they went Eurostar, freight, Eurotunnel in that order (this is me really racking my brains here, so happy to be corrected)


It wasn't a technical explanation as you can see haha, but it made it easier for someone with next to no signalling knowledge to understand (like myself).

So as you can imagine, very little freight and 'other' workings using the tunnel in daylight hours. In that sense, I suppose it's arguable that the tunnel is a victim of its own success, what with more and more people using it nowadays.

 

[jon0844]

Time to add more tracks? Maybe another one can go above, as I saw in Mission Impossible there's loads of room.

 

[CdBrux]

As someone who used to take Eurostar 5 or 6 times / year between Brussels & London I noticed that it wasn't so unusual for a Paris train and a Brussels train to leave / arrive St P just a few minutes apart. I assumed this was so that they followed each other through the tunnel. Similar observation in Le Shuttle, I have seen 2 shuttles leaving in quick succession (often 1 car and 1 freight) so that they follow each other. With the difference in speed mentioned above this makes some sense capacity wise.

 

[MikePJ]

As CdBrux says - the timetable is arranged so that the Eurostar trains travel in convoy through the tunnel, which minimises disruption to the shuttle service. When I took the Eurostar ski train service a few years ago the train manager was quite anxious that everyone boarded quickly and sorted out their luggage once under way, because of the risk of the train losing its slot for the Channel Tunnel if it arrived too late.

 

[coppercapped]

So as you can imagine, very little freight and 'other' workings using the tunnel in daylight hours. In that sense, I suppose it's arguable that the tunnel is a victim of its own success, what with more and more people using it nowadays.

Eh? Passenger traffic using Eurostar and Le Shuttle have both plateaued at just over 10 million per year for each service for the last five or six years. The figures bounce up and down a bit each year.

In the case of Eurostar this is about half the initially projected volumes. It also cost £9 billion more than its estimate which wiped out the shareholders' value completely. It is now essentially French owned.

Freight traffic is insignificant, it has been falling over the last three or so years and now is around a million tonnes per year. Alone the aggregates trains from the Mendips to London that run through my local station reach that ballpark each year.

The only good thing about the whole sorry story is that the British Government did not directly invest in, and lose money, digging the tunnel. It did however contribute to the building of the Channel Tunnel Rail Link which cost billions. Remind me, how many trains use that now each hour in each direction?

 

[GW43125]

Both le shuttle and eurostar use the same tracks in the tunnel

does this not cause congestion and limitation? Surely Eurostar trains travel much faster

No, as the speed limit in the Chunnel is 160 km/h (100mph)

 

[InOban]

Eh? Passenger traffic using Eurostar and Le Shuttle have both plateaued at just over 10 million per year for each service for the last five or six years. The figures bounce up and down a bit each year.

In the case of Eurostar this is about half the initially projected volumes. It also cost £9 billion more than its estimate which wiped out the shareholders' value completely. It is now essentially French owned.

Freight traffic is insignificant, it has been falling over the last three or so years and now is around a million tonnes per year. Alone the aggregates trains from the Mendips to London that run through my local station reach that ballpark each year.

The only good thing about the whole sorry story is that the British Government did not directly invest in, and lose money, digging the tunnel. It did however contribute to the building of the Channel Tunnel Rail Link which cost billions. Remind me, how many trains use that now each hour in each direction?

The French, like most other sensible economies, believe in investing in infrastructure, knowing that this brings wider long-term benefits. The City of London doesn't believe in long-term investment in real businesses. That's why the tunnel is used by the Brits but owned largely by the French.

I get a nice dividend from my Eurotunnel shares!

 

[MarlowDonkey]

No, as the speed limit in the Chunnel is 160 km/h (100mph)

At some time during the construction, they reduced the maximum allowed speed so as to save some money. Perhaps it's something to do with air pressure or track maintenance costs.

 

[duesselmartin]

One can certainly feel the train slowing as it aproaches the tunnel. As mentioned that increases capacity. Technically 300kmh in tunnels is possible as German and French HSL shows

 

[Bald Rick]

As has been said, each Eurostar uses approx 3 'standard' shuttle paths. But the crossing time isn't that much different - about 19 mins for Eurostar and 23min for shuttles. (The 3 paths represent 2 minute headways).

The track alignment in the tunnel is designed to cope with heavy freights (incl shuttles) travelling at 120-140kph and Eurostars at 160. This means there is a compromise on the alignment to suit.

As an aside, HS1 has the same compromise, but for freight at 120kph and Eurostars at 300kph. This makes the alignment imperfect for both, and increases rail wear on curves.

 

[coppercapped]

The French, like most other sensible economies, believe in investing in infrastructure, knowing that this brings wider long-term benefits. The City of London doesn't believe in long-term investment in real businesses. That's why the tunnel is used by the Brits but owned largely by the French.

I get a nice dividend from my Eurotunnel shares!

You realise that your dividend would have been much greater if the shares hadn't been diluted by the extra funding, raised from the banks and not the shareholders, needed to stave off bankruptcy?

The excessive cost of building and operating the tunnel means that there is a floor cost under which fares and tariffs cannot fall. This also means that the ferries don't have to compete on price as their minimum price is set by the tunnel. Without the tunnel cross-channel fares would be lower.

These higher fares are a wider long term benefit?

(Nobody expected the French to use the Tunnel - firstly the French don't really travel[1], except to French speaking DOM/TOMs, and certainly not to the UK with its iffy weather and awful food. It's the Brits that travel and they used to do it on British-owned ships).

[1] With the exception of those French living in London for business purposes - but there are not enough of them to justify a multi-billion pound tunnel.

 

[Ianno87]

As someone who used to take Eurostar 5 or 6 times / year between Brussels & London I noticed that it wasn't so unusual for a Paris train and a Brussels train to leave / arrive St P just a few minutes apart. I assumed this was so that they followed each other through the tunnel. Similar observation in Le Shuttle, I have seen 2 shuttles leaving in quick succession (often 1 car and 1 freight) so that they follow each other. With the difference in speed mentioned above this makes some sense capacity wise.

Eurostar standard paths are timed in pairs every half hour, as these are the fastest trains through the tunnel. This maximises the space left in the between each pair of Eurostars to run the slower shuttle and freight trains, with the surroubding Eurostars as far apart as possible through the 'flighting' method.

The approaching/diverging junctions at both ends unto the terminals are fully grade separated, so that train paths can be optimised for the most capacity-efficient sequence through the tunnel, rather than worrying about flat junction conflicts and the like.

 

[BigCj34]

Though it's unlikely the tunnel would be built if it was proposed today, it does make sense to link three of Europe's largest urban areas by high speed rail. Also there are more French in London than Bordeaux.

 

[coppercapped]

Though it's unlikely the tunnel would be built if it was proposed today, it does make sense to link three of Europe's largest urban areas by high speed rail. Also there are more French in London than Bordeaux.

But not at any cost.

More French in London than Bordeaux? An urban myth, see here or here.

Whether business leaders or students, bankers or artists, bartenders or footballers, there are a lot of French people in London.

Exactly how many, though, is unclear -- and it's a subject of much debate.

A total of 120,000 French citizens are registered as residents in the United Kingdom. But European Union citizens are not required to register with authorities[1].

The French consulate believes the figure 120,000 represents about 40 percent of the actual number, estimated to be about 300,000, two-thirds of them in Greater London.

That makes the British capital about the 50th French city, equivalent to the urban area of the coastal city of La Rochelle in western France.

[1] In the UK. In France, Germany, Belgium and many (most?) other continental countries everybody has to register with the authorities.

 

[InOban]

You realise that your dividend would have been much greater if the shares hadn't been diluted by the extra funding, raised from the banks and not the shareholders, needed to stave off bankruptcy?

The excessive cost of building and operating the tunnel means that there is a floor cost under which fares and tariffs cannot fall. This also means that the ferries don't have to compete on price as their minimum price is set by the tunnel. Without the tunnel cross-channel fares would be lower.

These higher fares are a wider long term benefit?

(Nobody expected the French to use the Tunnel - firstly the French don't really travel[1], except to French speaking DOM/TOMs, and certainly not to the UK with its iffy weather and awful food. It's the Brits that travel and they used to do it on British-owned ships).

[1] With the exception of those French living in London for business purposes - but there are not enough of them to justify a multi-billion pound tunnel.

I think you should read the financial reports. It may have cost much more to construct than predicted, but it costs relatively little to run. Its revenue is over 1bn euro. Its net consolidated profit is 200m euro. The ferries, with their enormous wage and fuel bills, are running at a loss.

If the City had been prepared to put up much more of the finance as equity rather than loans, then there wouldn't have been anything like the financial issues that arose. But the idea that the City institutions would invest in something that wouldn't deliver a dividend for many years? They have difficulty in investing overnight.

 

[bavvo]

The excessive cost of building and operating the tunnel means that there is a floor cost under which fares and tariffs cannot fall. This also means that the ferries don't have to compete on price as their minimum price is set by the tunnel. Without the tunnel cross-channel fares would be lower.

It seems a lot cheaper to cross the Channel then to cross the Irish Sea. Is there any evidence that channel crossings (for passengers or cars/trucks) cost more since the tunnel opened, compared with similar sea crossings elsewhere?

 

[edwin_m]

Eh? Passenger traffic using Eurostar and Le Shuttle have both plateaued at just over 10 million per year for each service for the last five or six years. The figures bounce up and down a bit each year.

In the case of Eurostar this is about half the initially projected volumes. It also cost £9 billion more than its estimate which wiped out the shareholders' value completely. It is now essentially French owned.

Freight traffic is insignificant, it has been falling over the last three or so years and now is around a million tonnes per year. Alone the aggregates trains from the Mendips to London that run through my local station reach that ballpark each year.

The only good thing about the whole sorry story is that the British Government did not directly invest in, and lose money, digging the tunnel. It did however contribute to the building of the Channel Tunnel Rail Link which cost billions. Remind me, how many trains use that now each hour in each direction?

I think the previous poster was referring to the number of road vehicle shuttles using Eurotunnel, which I believe are the majority of its business.

It's not really fair to compare an aggregates flow, which is heavy and low-value, with the sort of lower-weight high-value intermodal goods that are increasing on the domestic network. However it is true that rail freight through the Tunnel has fallen well short, one of the main reason being the immigrant issue that British and French authorities have failed to keep on top of. It seems to be under control at present but shippers need confidence that it will remain so. With several disruptions last year and Macron talking about ending the present joint arrangement that confidence probably isn't there.

The prime user of HS1 is probably Southeastern, with six departures from St Pancas between 1700 and 1800 by my count. The speed difference between the 395s and the Eurostars is one reason the train count on HS1 will never get near the sorts of figures proposed for HS2.

 

[LNW-GW Joint]

At some time during the construction, they reduced the maximum allowed speed so as to save some money. Perhaps it's something to do with air pressure or track maintenance costs.

Originally, all trains were to run at 160km/h.
During construction, Eurotunnel reduced the electrical spec so that 140km/h was the limit for heavy shuttle and rail freight traffic (ie anything loco-hauled).
The sleepers, had they ever run, would have been limited to 140km/h.
So as far as Eurostar is concerned, the speed limit was not changed, but capacity was cut because of the speed differential.
They flight trains to maximise the available capacity.
Neither Eurostar or (particularly) rail freight has ever run much more than half the capacity available to them, whereas Eurotunnel shuttle demand continues to increase.

 

[coppercapped]

I think you should read the financial reports. It may have cost much more to construct than predicted, but it costs relatively little to run. Its revenue is over 1bn euro. Its net consolidated profit is 200m euro. The ferries, with their enormous wage and fuel bills, are running at a loss.

If the City had been prepared to put up much more of the finance as equity rather than loans, then there wouldn't have been anything like the financial issues that arose. But the idea that the City institutions would invest in something that wouldn't deliver a dividend for many years? They have difficulty in investing overnight.

I have read the financial reports. I also (still) own some shares, bought when TransMancheLink was first set up so you don't need to lecture me. There were huge write-downs of money which had been invested before the current semi-stable financial state was reached.

One billion Euros turnover with a profit of €200 million. And the thing cost, at current prices, some £13 billion, say €15 billion. As a return on investment that's not a lot to write home about.

If you had a sum of money to invest, would you invest it in a project where you know that you will have to wait for several years before receiving a dividend or would you invest it where there is a very good chance of receiving a dividend 12 months later? Foregoing interest also has a cost - a very significant one with the amount of money that was involved.

Financial institutions are not charities in spite the snide remark in your last sentence.

The re-financing of the Channel Tunnel was a very drawn out affair with many financial institutions, both in Britain and abroad, being involved as none wanted too great an exposure to what was a very risky venture. It was within a hair's breadth of being abandoned. It was not only 'the City' - it was also 'Frankfurt', Paris, Zürich, Singapore, New York and so on.

 

[coppercapped]

I think the previous poster was referring to the number of road vehicle shuttles using Eurotunnel, which I believe are the majority of its business.

It's not really fair to compare an aggregates flow, which is heavy and low-value, with the sort of lower-weight high-value intermodal goods that are increasing on the domestic network. However it is true that rail freight through the Tunnel has fallen well short, one of the main reason being the immigrant issue that British and French authorities have failed to keep on top of. It seems to be under control at present but shippers need confidence that it will remain so. With several disruptions last year and Macron talking about ending the present joint arrangement that confidence probably isn't there.

The prime user of HS1 is probably Southeastern, with six departures from St Pancas between 1700 and 1800 by my count. The speed difference between the 395s and the Eurostars is one reason the train count on HS1 will never get near the sorts of figures proposed for HS2.

One of the freight trains through the Tunnel carries china clay - my comparison was well chosen as there is practically no multi-modal traffic through the Tunnel. Freight tonnage over the last four years in millions (rounded):

• 2013: 1.36
• 2014: 1.65
• 2015: 1.42
• 2016: 1.04

For three of the last four years traffic has been falling. If I remember rightly the train ferries carried more.

The Channel Tunnel Rail Link cost some £6 billion in 2003 pounds, say about £8 billion now. And it carries 6 domestic and a couple of international trains each way in the peak hour, fewer during the day. I can think of better places on the UK network to spend that money and which would benefit more people.

 

[paul1609]

(Nobody expected the French to use the Tunnel - firstly the French don't really travel[1], except to French speaking DOM/TOMs, and certainly not to the UK with its iffy weather and awful food. It's the Brits that travel and they used to do it on British-owned ships).

[1] With the exception of those French living in London for business purposes - but there are not enough of them to justify a multi-billion pound tunnel.

Thats not really true anymore, at the Kent &East Sussex railway we get loads of visitors from the near continent to the extent that we are currently updating our ticketing and sales systems to be able to accept Euros in normal transactions. Thomas the tank engine events are extremely popular with the Belgians and we have regulars that come to 3 events a year. Stand in the car park at the Tesco at junction 10 of the M20 or the Ashford designer outlet and you will see French registered cars galore on day or weekend shopping trips to kent.

 

[coppercapped]

Thats not really true anymore, at the Kent &East Sussex railway we get loads of visitors from the near continent to the extent that we are currently updating our ticketing and sales systems to be able to accept Euros in normal transactions. Thomas the tank engine events are extremely popular with the Belgians and we have regulars that come to 3 events a year. Stand in the car park at the Tesco at junction 10 of the M20 or the Ashford designer outlet and you will see French registered cars galore on day or weekend shopping trips to kent.

At the risk of being seen to categorise people, Belgians (and Dutch) travel - you see their cars all over the continent of Europe. The French don't - at least not in anything like the same numbers. I used to live in Munich - French cars were noticeable by their absence whereas Dutch, Belgian, Danish, Swedish, Italian and even Spanish cars were present in numbers during the holiday season. I doubt whether many French cars go much further than Kent.

Getting back to the Channel Tunnel - my impression over my last few trips in the Eurostar is that its main business is conveying American, Japanese and Chinese tourists from England to France - and vice versa.

 

[Joe Paxton]

Getting back to the Channel Tunnel - my impression over my last few trips in the Eurostar is that its main business is conveying American, Japanese and Chinese tourists from England to France - and vice versa.

Not my impression but it seems like you've resolutely made up your mind on this so little point in arguing the toss...

 

[SpacePhoenix]

What would the total construction costs of HS1 and the tunnel itself be in today's money?

 

[telstarbox]

Thats not really true anymore, at the Kent &East Sussex railway we get loads of visitors from the near continent to the extent that we are currently updating our ticketing and sales systems to be able to accept Euros in normal transactions. Thomas the tank engine events are extremely popular with the Belgians and we have regulars that come to 3 events a year. Stand in the car park at the Tesco at junction 10 of the M20 or the Ashford designer outlet and you will see French registered cars galore on day or weekend shopping trips to kent.

Interesting - the Designer Outlet makes sense but what are French people buying in Tesco that they can't get in Carrefour? Are they really into salted caramel doughnuts?

 

[InOban]

I have read the financial reports. I also (still) own some shares, bought when TransMancheLink was first set up so you don't need to lecture me. There were huge write-downs of money which had been invested before the current semi-stable financial state was reached.

One billion Euros turnover with a profit of €200 million. And the thing cost, at current prices, some £13 billion, say €15 billion. As a return on investment that's not a lot to write home about.

If you had a sum of money to invest, would you invest it in a project where you know that you will have to wait for several years before receiving a dividend or would you invest it where there is a very good chance of receiving a dividend 12 months later? Foregoing interest also has a cost - a very significant one with the amount of money that was involved.

Financial institutions are not charities in spite the snide remark in your last sentence.

The re-financing of the Channel Tunnel was a very drawn out affair with many financial institutions, both in Britain and abroad, being involved as none wanted too great an exposure to what was a very risky venture. It was within a hair's breadth of being abandoned. It was not only 'the City' - it was also 'Frankfurt', Paris, Zürich, Singapore, New York and so on.

But those who invested in it now have a real asset that will pay a dividend for the foreseeable future. Instead the banks etc invested in derivatives etc which appeared to show quick profits, and so gave the bankers their bonuses, but in the end bankrupted them and the country.