Dutch start-up proposes cross-channel service to compete with Eurostar.

[Wolfie]

I think there is a good possibility of being able to run a coach & rail service from Ebbesfleet. You can get a catchment area as large as South + South East + East. In particular it might be appealing to tourists from Continental Europe with a lot of luggage looking to travel to destinations further away and not wanting to deal with the nightmare that is interchanging in Central London.

One possible option if the ETA for UK and Schegen get going is having fully automated passport control at UK and EU train stations, maybe with security contracted out to a private company and local police. Only people with a European passport and registered ETA can travel, and there is a risk of rejection if you are unable to fully satisfy the system.

I've also always been a fan of the RER model for high speed rail, wanting to send the high speed trains in a tunnel through Central London with three stops, but you could theoretically send the trains to Old Oak Common with a link between HS1 and HS2. OOC would provide an interchange with GWR, CR and WCML, along with tube and occasionally Southern (and hopefully SWR).

Re your second para, at least in the UK, no chance.

 

[renegademaster]

Even if you get the passport issue sorted out, the Chunnel has annoying security checks that need to be done on every bag

 

[Wolfie]

Even if you get the passport issue sorted out, the Chunnel has annoying security checks that need to be done on every bag

Given incidents like 7/7 and the Madrid train bombings that won't change.

 

[renegademaster]

Re your second para, at least in the UK, no chance.

For a government allegedly paranoid about illegal immigration we are quite a bit more liberal with Europeans traveling here than they are with us and other non EUs traveling to us. They(with the addition of ANZAC , USA, Japan and some other rich countries ) can use our automated e gates at our airports

 

[SocietyForFer]

Given incidents like 7/7 and the Madrid train bombings that won't change.

That would give the Spanish high speed railway stations an advantage since they already have luggage security in place.

 

[Wolfie]

For a government allegedly paranoid about illegal immigration we are quite a bit more liberal with Europeans traveling here than they are with us and other non EUs traveling to us. They(with the addition of ANZAC , USA, Japan and some other rich countries ) can use our automated e gates at our airports

It isn't "rich" countries. It is countries whose security measures we have confidence in, including their biometric enrolment.

That would give the Spanish high speed railway stations an advantage since they already have luggage security in place.

True. Would still need an agreement to juxtaposed immigration controls though.

 

[rvdborgt]

Given incidents like 7/7 and the Madrid train bombings that won't change.

And none of the secutainment on long-distance trains (such as Eurostar) would have stopped those incidents.

 

[zwk500]

Can you turn round trains at Ebbsfleet?

As this doesn't seem to have been answered - yes, but not easily. Only 1 international platform (the normally Southbound one) has a connection to both lines at the country end, so you either massively restrict capacity or run wrong-road https://traksy.uk/live/M+36+EBSFDOM

 

[Wolfie]

And none of the secutainment on long-distance trains (such as Eurostar) would have stopped those incidents.

Not quite sure what you mean by secutainment. I do agree though that both attacks were on local services. 7/7 was though in a tunnel where the blast effects were amplified.

 

[SocietyForFer]

As this doesn't seem to have been answered - yes, but not easily. Only 1 international platform (the normally Southbound one) has a connection to both lines at the country end, so you either massively restrict capacity or run wrong-road https://traksy.uk/live/M+36+EBSFDOM

There are passing tracks and four platforms at Ebbesfleet. Considering the Eurostar services no longer call at Ebbesfleet, surely you could get the Eurostar trains to use the passing tracks and hold the trains at Ebbesfleet?

 

[zwk500]

There are passing tracks and four platforms at Ebbesfleet. Considering the Eurostar services no longer call at Ebbesfleet, surely you could get the Eurostar trains to use the passing tracks and hold the trains at Ebbesfleet?

2 platforms are domestic only and half the length of a Eurostar train. The Non-stop trains would indeed use the passing tracks but you would still be blocking the southbound international platform should you want to run more services or Eurostar want to restart Ebbsfleet calls for the M25 parkway. Also, you have a flat crossing at the south end which although there are gaps is still an operational constraint to manage.

In short, you could do it if today's service levels were maintained long-term, but if anybody wanted to put Ebbsfleet calls in St Pancras trains, terminating international trains there would quickly become a big problem. And that's before we've looked at passenger capacity, and the economics of falling short of your largest market by 15 minutes.

 

[Citybreak1]

There are passing tracks and four platforms at Ebbesfleet. Considering the Eurostar services no longer call at Ebbesfleet, surely you could get the Eurostar trains to use the passing tracks and hold the trains at Ebbesfleet?

I have been on Eurostar when they stopped in Kent and very few use it. I wish people would stop saying use Kent and a low budget option. Where in any of the proposals does it say low budget? Eurostar is about city to city transfer. The low passenger numbers don’t stack up. Eurostar can’t afford it. All the proposals say London. And realistically only one of these proposals will ever see light of day i predict so capacity won’t be an issue. We don’t need another 10 trains to Paris so hopefully they see sense and either Germany or Switzerland or atleast some extra capacity to Amsterdam to take over the airlines.

 

[SocietyForFer]

I think there is a good possibility of being able to run a coach & rail service from Ebbesfleet. You can get a catchment area as large as South + South East + East. In particular it might be appealing to tourists from Continental Europe with a lot of luggage looking to travel to destinations further away and not wanting to deal with the nightmare that is interchanging in Central London.

I view the Ebbesfleet station as being similar to how the Disneyland station in Paris is used as a base for low cost trains. Essentially Ebbesfleet would be a base for low cost buses. It's based of the proposal by the what was thought to be National Express Mobico consortium.

I certainly see the Basel train working due to existing customs controls at Basel, and possibly routing the train through Germany might work at least eastbound (but not westbound due to passport checks).

 

[ShadowKnight]

Stratford international is within a destination area of itself I'd argue in zone 2/3 of London (fairly inside greater London) with the Olympic park, Westfield and wider east London region. It's well connected to the rest of London and elsewhere via DLR and Stratford regional station. It's not the middle of nowhere. People would be willing to travel further to a transport hub such as Stratford for long distance travel.

Regarding the question of reversing trains at Stratford, a run through to the NNL or even ST pancras to reverse (or even travel onwards to other destinations such as heathrow or Birmingham) seems to be much more feasible and cost effective. Compared to the previously mentioned impossibility of expanding St Pancras without the government cancelling such expansion in the not too distant future.

 

[Citybreak1]

Stratford international is within a destination area of itself I'd argue in zone 2/3 of London (fairly inside greater London) with the Olympic park, Westfield and wider east London region. It's well connected to the rest of London and elsewhere via DLR and Stratford regional station. It's not the middle of nowhere. People would be willing to travel further to a transport hub such as Stratford for long distance travel.

Regarding the question of reversing trains at Stratford, a run through to the NNL or even ST pancras to reverse (or even travel onwards to other destinations such as heathrow or Birmingham) seems to be much more feasible and cost effective. Compared to the previously mentioned impossibility of expanding St Pancras without the government cancelling such expansion in the not too distant future.

But it doesn’t have any passport or border facilities so surely it’s even lesser advantage to Kent. I think any start up would prefer to use one of Londons main stations for size even Waterloo or Euston. I don’t see Stratford as an attractive option.

 

[Wolfie]

But it doesn’t have any passport or border facilities so surely it’s even lesser advantage to Kent. I think any start up would prefer to use one of Londons main stations for size even Waterloo or Euston. I don’t see Stratford as an attractive option.

I certainly do not see Border Force or their French equivalent manning an additional London destination.

 

[ShadowKnight]

But it doesn’t have any passport or border facilities so surely it’s even lesser advantage to Kent.

Going off some of the assumptions of other posts saying it's London or bust. Stratford is in London, border facilites could be moved from one of the Kent stations if it is physical infrastructure. If it is more about staff, st pancras is 7 min away and city airport isn't far either

 

[SocietyForFer]

I have been on Eurostar when they stopped in Kent and very few use it. I wish people would stop saying use Kent and a low budget option. Where in any of the proposals does it say low budget? Eurostar is about city to city transfer. The low passenger numbers don’t stack up. Eurostar can’t afford it. All the proposals say London. And realistically only one of these proposals will ever see light of day i predict so capacity won’t be an issue. We don’t need another 10 trains to Paris so hopefully they see sense and either Germany or Switzerland or atleast some extra capacity to Amsterdam to take over the airlines.

I view the Ebbesfleet station as being similar to how the Disneyland station in Paris is used as a base for low cost trains. Essentially Ebbesfleet would be a base for low cost buses. It's based of the proposal by the what was thought to be National Express Mobico consortium.

I certainly see the Basel train working due to existing customs controls at Basel, and possibly routing the train through Germany might work at least eastbound (but not westbound due to passport checks).

 

[Citybreak1]

Going off some of the assumptions of other posts saying it's London or bust. Stratford is in London, border facilites could be moved from one of the Kent stations if it is physical infrastructure. If it is more about staff, st pancras is 7 min away and city airport isn't far either

If Eurostar reopen Kent stations I think these other suggestions could work. But seems they are more focused on key routes. I see more Amsterdam trains more likely. Articles talk about them cutting back on other stations but if they could run 10 trains a day to Amsterdam this would affect air travel and less flights. A lot can change as finger prints will replace stamps. More e gates and digital tickets. Speeding things up will create more room at St Pancras.

 

[AlbertBeale]

All these proposals suffer from the same fatal flaw, lack of space and facilities at St Pancras, until that can be addressed I do not see how any additional services can operate.

Services could use a different starting point in the UK, but the reason Eurostar is running at capacity a lot of the time is because St Pancras is convenient, with good connections for passengers originating within London, as well as further afield. ECML and MML both terminate within the King Cross - St Pancras complex, and the WCML is 10 mins walk, thats a huge section of the country that has easy, one train access to Eurostar. It would be interesting to colour a map and show all towns and cities that have a direct service in to King Cross - St Pancras, and possibly Euston as well.

If people travelling to Central London or points beyond end up at Ebbsfleet or Ashford, and have to change trains/modes then the advantage over flying is immediately eroded, and the business case to charge more than a low cost air fare is eroded with it so its no longer profitable

The only scope I see might be a low cost operation from Ashford to Lille Europe, but this was discussed in another thread and given tunnel access charges it looks to me like the cost difference might not be enough to make it attractive.

So this raises two questions, where to expand the facilities at St Pancras, and who is going to pay because its going to be very expensive. I think its very unlikely to be subsidised even by a Euro friendly government as the travel which results would be seen as discretionary or business based, the full cost of which shoud be born by the travellers and quite rightly should not be subsidised. This is before you even get into Border control issues.

The where to expand is an even bigger issue, there just isnt any space without major demolition, the British library hems it in to the west, to the east of Kings Cross might work but would be horrendously expensive, and underground is also very congested.

So yes the demand is there for further services, and premium fares could probably be charged, but unless capacity at the London end can be massively increased I dont see how they will ever get off the ground.

Where on earth "to the east of Kings Cross" is either available for extra boarding facilities or usable given how far it would be from St P?

If the idea is to have services to other destinations - such as Basel - which currently require a change of train at the mainland Europe end of the Eurostar journey, then maybe needing to access a different (from St P) station at the UK end isn't a game changer. Still just one change, but - eg - a same-station one at Ashford rather than a (sometimes different station) one in Paris. If it meant fuller use of HS1/tunnel capacity, and so the possibility of reduced access charges, it might still be possible to devise an alternative which was good value compared to existing journeys London-Paris-Basel. For example, if such beyond-Paris/Brussels services started from Ashford, the Eurostar ticket might include travel from St P to Ashford for the connection there. Maybe a dedicated non-stop (or at least semi-fast) feeder from each of several places could be timed to arrive around each check-in time and leave after each arrival time at Ashford. One to and from St P of course, maybe one to/from south London (even Waterloo, using the connection to the Kent lines built when Waterloo was the Eurostar terminus), maybe one to/from Brighton. Even maybe a through train from west/north of London - Reading? OOC?!

'Planned' in the UK, you must be joking surely. Takes cynical hat off.

What was seen as adequate at the time of construction is now at capacity due to a number of things making train travel to the continent more attractive

• Problems at UK airports, and the often poor experience that results when flying, low cost airlines hidden charges, out of town departure and arrival points add to journey time, airport delays, the need to arrive well before departure, luggage restrictions and the lack of comfort when travelling by air to name a few.
• Increased border controls (but I think this is overplayed, the actual slowdown in throughput is fairly small)
• The increase in passengers as people realise they get from London to Paris or Brussels in around two hours by train. To me Hs1 and the resulting speed up tipped the balance to the train from flying.
• A general increase in rail travel over the last 15+ years since St Pancras opened.

The area to the west of St Pancras where the British Library and the Francis Crick institute now stand, which I think used to be the old goods yards should have been protected from development to allow room for growth, but that opportunity is now lost.

You're forgetting that the BL at St P was being built in the '80s [following a local campaign in Bloomsbury in the '60s to stop 7 acres of housing there being knocked down for the new library, and a decision in the '70s to build at St P instead]; and this was long before KX/StP was fixed on as a/the terminal for the Chunnel trains. So by the time anyone might have even dreamt of allocating room for expansion, the old Goods Yard to the west was already being used. Anyway, if it's just extra processing space that's needed, not platform capacity, there's a fair bit of leeway in the shopping mall which St P station is attached to...

As I understand it from reading this thread, the issue at St Pancras is Passenger and border processing capacity, not physical infrastructure capacity for terminating trains. Is there scope for adding stops at Stratford International, and using this to specifically restrict ticket sales from St Pancras. So a train calling at both has a percentage of tickets allocated to each station, and once they are sold, then only tickets from Other stations for that service could be purchased, thus spreading the passenger load between international stations? Shoot me down if this is wrong. Understand Kent stations are not passenger friendly, but Stratford Int. vs St Pancras wouldn't make much difference to many passengers.

Yes - in the short term, allocating a quota of tickets on some of the trains for use only from/to Stratford or Ashford (especially from), would spread the load and enable extra services to run. These tickets could be sold at a discount compared to St P tickets on the same train. And if these were services also stopping at Lille anyway, ie not the ones with the fastest headline journey time, the delay caused by the extra stop might be acceptable. And if this were done particularly on any new beyond-Paris/Brussels routes, again that might be less of an issue on what's a longer trip anyway.

Are you proposing an end to juxtaposed controls? Currently no Eurostars have arrival checks.

(It's not a bad idea, to be honest, doing all the checks in London in both directions; it'd allow through service to any European station. Would need a Home Office not trying to exploit a loophole in asylum law, though.)

Of course this would mean there'd be an even greater shortage of facilities at St P, especially if services to/from more places all needed to use the St P terminal - and this is presumably exactly what this system is intended to enable.

Maybe one way of trying to overcome immigration problems would be an explicit condition attached to tickets on any of these services, which users had to sign up to, that the ticket didn't allow access to the UK, but only to a zone at the UK station which was legally recognised as being within Schengen. Then, anyone not allowed in would have to be sent back on a returning service at the cost of the transport company concerned [not an uncommon system of course, in other contexts]. This would encourage the rail companies to check passengers' bona fides themselves; and might also need the Schengen system to agree to this and agree to take people back in this situation. But if other countries saw the advantage of more through services between their cities and London, they might think this a price worth paying.

Re the Kent trains going to Stratford firstly you would kill the utility of domestic HS1 services (which currently charge premium fares) and secondly there are not, as far as l am aware, reversing facilities at Stratford.

No, not coming from the east there aren't.

I think there is a good possibility of being able to run a coach & rail service from Ebbesfleet. You can get a catchment area as large as South + South East + East. In particular it might be appealing to tourists from Continental Europe with a lot of luggage looking to travel to destinations further away and not wanting to deal with the nightmare that is interchanging in Central London.

One possible option if the ETA for UK and Schegen get going is having fully automated passport control at UK and EU train stations, maybe with security contracted out to a private company and local police. Only people with a European passport and registered ETA can travel, and there is a risk of rejection if you are unable to fully satisfy the system.

I've also always been a fan of the RER model for high speed rail, wanting to send the high speed trains in a tunnel through Central London with three stops, but you could theoretically send the trains to Old Oak Common with a link between HS1 and HS2. OOC would provide an interchange with GWR, CR and WCML, along with tube and occasionally Southern (and hopefully SWR).

Well - to save the horrendous cost of another tunnel being woven under London, there is of course a track link (though no doubt not signalled etc appropriately at the moment) enabling trains from the HS1 tunnel to head onto the NLL instead of into StP; and the NLL gets you more or less to OOC. So, if there was anywhere to build an extra platform or two, accessible from the NLL routes, at OOC, with space for terminal facilities to match.... This can't be any less likely than an actual link (ie with through running) between HS1 and HS2!

 

[mike57]

Where on earth "to the east of Kings Cross" is either available for extra boarding facilities or usable given how far it would be from St P?

If you were prepared to spend a lot of money you could build a new station immediately to the east of King X with new tunnels linking it in to the existing HS1 tunnels roughly under Caledonian Road overground station. This could then be used for HS1 domestic services, and the space freed up in St Pancras used to expand the international station. Could you do it, yes, but cost and the demolition required would probably rule it out. Tunnels would be around 1 mile long, but as I said 'Could', yes 'Would' probably not, and certainly not in the current climate.

 

[YorkRailFan]

As this doesn't seem to have been answered - yes, but not easily. Only 1 international platform (the normally Southbound one) has a connection to both lines at the country end, so you either massively restrict capacity or run wrong-road https://traksy.uk/live/M+36+EBSFDOM

That feels like an unnecessary hassle.

 

[mad_rich]

There is an enormous amount of space between King's Cross and St Pancras, currently being used for low-capacity cars and taxis, and a few buses.

With a bit of architectural nouse, you could build a new check-in area there, just as they did with the King's Cross side extension. (Preferably as pretty and well-received as that, rather than the 1970s monstrosity!) Alongside the shopping mall, as mentioned above, there's plenty of space to work with.

 

[Nunners]

There is an enormous amount of space between King's Cross and St Pancras, currently being used for low-capacity cars and taxis, and a few buses.

The enormous £1bn Google headquarters

 

[Wolfie]

Where on earth "to the east of Kings Cross" is either available for extra boarding facilities or usable given how far it would be from St P?

If the idea is to have services to other destinations - such as Basel - which currently require a change of train at the mainland Europe end of the Eurostar journey, then maybe needing to access a different (from St P) station at the UK end isn't a game changer. Still just one change, but - eg - a same-station one at Ashford rather than a (sometimes different station) one in Paris. If it meant fuller use of HS1/tunnel capacity, and so the possibility of reduced access charges, it might still be possible to devise an alternative which was good value compared to existing journeys London-Paris-Basel. For example, if such beyond-Paris/Brussels services started from Ashford, the Eurostar ticket might include travel from St P to Ashford for the connection there. Maybe a dedicated non-stop (or at least semi-fast) feeder from each of several places could be timed to arrive around each check-in time and leave after each arrival time at Ashford. One to and from St P of course, maybe one to/from south London (even Waterloo, using the connection to the Kent lines built when Waterloo was the Eurostar terminus), maybe one to/from Brighton. Even maybe a through train from west/north of London - Reading? OOC?!



You're forgetting that the BL at St P was being built in the '80s [following a local campaign in Bloomsbury in the '60s to stop 7 acres of housing there being knocked down for the new library, and a decision in the '70s to build at St P instead]; and this was long before KX/StP was fixed on as a/the terminal for the Chunnel trains. So by the time anyone might have even dreamt of allocating room for expansion, the old Goods Yard to the west was already being used. Anyway, if it's just extra processing space that's needed, not platform capacity, there's a fair bit of leeway in the shopping mall which St P station is attached to...



Yes - in the short term, allocating a quota of tickets on some of the trains for use only from/to Stratford or Ashford (especially from), would spread the load and enable extra services to run. These tickets could be sold at a discount compared to St P tickets on the same train. And if these were services also stopping at Lille anyway, ie not the ones with the fastest headline journey time, the delay caused by the extra stop might be acceptable. And if this were done particularly on any new beyond-Paris/Brussels routes, again that might be less of an issue on what's a longer trip anyway.



Of course this would mean there'd be an even greater shortage of facilities at St P, especially if services to/from more places all needed to use the St P terminal - and this is presumably exactly what this system is intended to enable.

Maybe one way of trying to overcome immigration problems would be an explicit condition attached to tickets on any of these services, which users had to sign up to, that the ticket didn't allow access to the UK, but only to a zone at the UK station which was legally recognised as being within Schengen. Then, anyone not allowed in would have to be sent back on a returning service at the cost of the transport company concerned [not an uncommon system of course, in other contexts]. This would encourage the rail companies to check passengers' bona fides themselves; and might also need the Schengen system to agree to this and agree to take people back in this situation. But if other countries saw the advantage of more through services between their cities and London, they might think this a price worth paying.



No, not coming from the east there aren't.



Well - to save the horrendous cost of another tunnel being woven under London, there is of course a track link (though no doubt not signalled etc appropriately at the moment) enabling trains from the HS1 tunnel to head onto the NLL instead of into StP; and the NLL gets you more or less to OOC. So, if there was anywhere to build an extra platform or two, accessible from the NLL routes, at OOC, with space for terminal facilities to match.... This can't be any less likely than an actual link (ie with through running) between HS1 and HS2!

Have you seen how busy the NLL already is and how built up it is along its whole route (a big chunk of which is prime London real estate - a one bed ex-Council flat goes for £500k in much of Islington or Camden for example). Your last para, which would likely mean destroying busy successful local services (the original London Overground line) to accommodate long distance travel, has in my view absolutely no chance of flying.

Disclosure: l live adjacent to the NLL and would be one of those considering taking active civil disobedience if it was tried.

 

[mad_rich]

The enormous £1bn Google headquarters

I'm talking about the southern end of Pancras road, south of the KGX extension. It's currently a road, a taxi stand, a Pret and a large plaza that sometimes has stalls selling nice cakes. Right next to the current Eurostar terminal

You could double the size of the check in area and still have plenty of public space left over.

 

[Wolfie]

I'm talking about the southern end of Pancras road, south of the KGX extension. It's currently a road, a taxi stand, a Pret and a large plaza that sometimes has stalls selling nice cakes. Right next to the current Eurostar terminal

You could double the size of the check in area and still have plenty of public space left over.

So in other words most of the planning gain promised to the local community (the very same people who have been messed around over HS2 for years) in exchange for putting up with the St Pancras and then Kings Cross redevelopments would go to benefit speculative commercial ventures (no mention of either getting planning approval to destroy key aspects of a prime Grade l listed building or who pays l note). Not to mention the environment used to get companies such as Google to move into the area.

Expect some serious opposition from locals, both individuals and corporates, including the local MP who you may just have heard of.....

Let's just say that they would access to very good lawyers.

 

[SynthD]

People saying lack of space at St Pancras. I imagine these new operators have a solution to this. Why would they plan it without a solution? Maybe they should make these plans public. I know they have ruled out using Kent.

I think they want other people to do it, as do Eurostar, the HS1/station owners, and the government. The French owners of the first may not want to put pressure on the French border agency to send enough staff to London.

If "The Circle" (the northern set of shops at St Pancras) were converted into a third Eurostar controlled space, they could have a staircase to (a cordoned off) platform 11. Put on a shuttle to take people who have cleared the regular Eurostar ticket, customs and passport checks to one of the Kent stations where the cheap operator can quickly shuffle them to a train to Paris. Or run a shorter through train that joins up with another in Kent. A station on HS1 is the only option, everything else means narrower and slower trains.

 

[SocietyForFer]

Why is building on viaducts and a terminus at a higher level never thought of as a reasonable option? There is plenty of space to build another level on top of the domestic tracks at St Pancras that could be used to accommodate "half trains".

Have you seen how busy the NLL already is and how built up it is along its whole route (a big chunk of which is prime London real estate - a one bed ex-Council flat goes for £500k in much of Islington or Camden for example). Your last para, which would likely mean destroying busy successful local services (the original London Overground line) to accommodate long distance travel, has in my view absolutely no chance of flying.

Disclosure: l live adjacent to the NLL and would be one of those considering taking active civil disobedience if it was tried.

My personal idea would be to build a tunnel with stops at Canary Wharf, Southbank (between London Bridge and Waterloo but with a stop on Thameslink) and Old Oak Common, providing transfers for the various railway regions out of the south. This can also be used to send HS2 trains through Southbank all the way to Dover.

Otherwise an interconnection to HS1 with a terminus at OCC might be cheaper than remodelling and expanding an existing London terminus, whilst providing connectivity to people from the South West and West.

 

[SynthD]

Why is building on viaducts and a terminus at a higher level never thought of as a reasonable option?

It was considered for Euston, but it is massively more disruptive. The tunnel portal needs to be further away. Not an option for St Pancras.

Your loop idea would be better for the domestic services. The junction will be impossible to build, as HS1 is under railways.