Go to bed in Swansea, wake up in Paris

[zwk500]

Rubbish. The Chunnel has the service tunnel as well as the other running tunnel. I suspect that these together are just as good as

Again - I don't make the rules. But the service tunnel is not the same as a firefighting station which is what new tunnels are built with, and having escape shafts mid length halves the maximum distance passengers must travel before they can remove themselves from the tunnel.

 

[Krokodil]

Very, lorries especially. There are lots of bits of equipment as you go through the terminals.

Are cars searched for potentially dangerous goods? Not just Syrians hiding in the boot.

 

[popeter45]

What easy loophole? The ETA will make it possible to make sure that only people able to enter the UK legally can board the train. No documents, no travel, end of story.

ETA needs more biometrics than now like fingerprints ever time you leave so makes checks more complex not easier

and the loophole i was saying was somebody sneaking on without valid documents and once in UK claiming asylum, current system with secured platforms stops that

 

[DanielB]

and having escape shafts mid length halves the maximum distance passengers must travel before they can remove themselves from the tunnel.

Having an escape shaft ending up in the middle of the sea wouldn't be that safe, would it?
The service tunnel of the Channel Tunnel is pressurized AFAIK, avoiding hazards from the running tunnels entering it together with evacuated passengers.

 

[JonasB]

Is it really necessary? What other railway tunnels do those kind of checks? How thoroughly are vehicles on the car/lorry shuttles checked?

Probably not. But there was a fear of terrorist attacks when the tunnel opened.

 

[popeter45]

Probably not. But there was a fear of terrorist attacks when the tunnel opened.

also the unique issue of people deciding its a bright idea to bring back unexploded shells from WW1 battlefields, not that common at the moment but still enough of a risk to warrent the checks

 

[cle]

Any thread on these types of topics always descends into the security rubbish. What a small island and small people we really are.

 

[JonasB]

also the unique issue of people deciding its a bright idea to bring back unexploded shells from WW1 battlefields, not that common at the moment but still enough of a risk to warrent the checks

But not enough of a risk to justify checking cars.

 

[Peter Mugridge]

also the unique issue of people deciding its a bright idea to bring back unexploded shells from WW1 battlefields, not that common at the moment but still enough of a risk to warrant the checks

It's a high enough risk that Eurostar have a security bod continuously at the top of the escalator onto the terminal level ( facing everyone who comes up the escalator ) holding up a sign with a crossed out shell on it.

 

[Cloud Strife]

ETA needs more biometrics than now like fingerprints ever time you leave so makes checks more complex not easier

and the loophole i was saying was somebody sneaking on without valid documents and once in UK claiming asylum, current system with secured platforms stops that

This is actually making life easier, not more complex. Fingerprints can be handled in the same way as Schengen is handling it, with pre-registration terminals before approaching the actual border crossing. EU ID cards are also featuring fingerprints, so it's very easy to link biometric documents with the fingerprints provided. The ETA will actually make life even more straightforward, because it will build up a comprehensive picture of the traveller before they even approach border control.

Secured platforms don't require border control. But if you want to maintain juxtaposed controls, the ETA will make it even more possible to set up remote border crossings staffed with just one or two staff and the rest done with e-gates. You could even go further and say that these outposts would only be accessible for UK+EEA/CH+others who can use e-gates and that those who need manual control can only go through Paris or Brussels.

Probably not. But there was a fear of terrorist attacks when the tunnel opened.

Yes, the current security arrangements are largely a consequence of the South Armagh IRA's campaign in England. Realistically, you could drop most of the controls with zero consequences.

also the unique issue of people deciding its a bright idea to bring back unexploded shells from WW1 battlefields, not that common at the moment but still enough of a risk to warrent the checks

That's really not a big deal at all. Simply tell people that being caught in possession of such a thing will be treated as being in possession of a bomb, and job done. It only takes one high profile arrest and prosecution to put a stop to such actions for good.

 

[zwk500]

That's really not a big deal at all. Simply tell people that being caught in possession of such a thing will be treated as being in possession of a bomb, and job done. It only takes one high profile arrest and prosecution to put a stop to such actions for good.

Evidence suggests that is not the case - people regularly try and carry bombs from various battlefields back despite regular news stories of prosecution.

 

[popeter45]

This is actually making life easier, not more complex. Fingerprints can be handled in the same way as Schengen is handling it, with pre-registration terminals before approaching the actual border crossing. EU ID cards are also featuring fingerprints, so it's very easy to link biometric documents with the fingerprints provided. The ETA will actually make life even more straightforward, because it will build up a comprehensive picture of the traveller before they even approach border control.

Secured platforms don't require border control. But if you want to maintain juxtaposed controls, the ETA will make it even more possible to set up remote border crossings staffed with just one or two staff and the rest done with e-gates. You could even go further and say that these outposts would only be accessible for UK+EEA/CH+others who can use e-gates and that those who need manual control can only go through Paris or Brussels.

sorry but no this isnt that case at all, all the checks MUST be made at the boarder, "pre checks" dont work as how do you handle impersonation, you will still need in person staff for such situations who will in effect be the same border staff as at present
ETA isnt some magical digitial fruture of easier passage, its a copy of ESTA and look how much of a pain that is over in the US

Yes, the current security arrangements are largely a consequence of the South Armagh IRA's campaign in England. Realistically, you could drop most of the controls with zero consequences.

it was originally IRA yes but now its about other forms of terrorist (e.g. ISIS or extreme far right), not to mention that post brexit has the customs/anti smuggling aspect

 

[Krokodil]

You could even go further and say that these outposts would only be accessible for UK+EEA/CH+others who can use e-gates and that those who need manual control can only go through Paris or Brussels.

It's worth noting here that "others" can include Canada, Australia, New Zealand and the US among others. One big issue though is that minors often need manual checks.

Yes, the current security arrangements are largely a consequence of the South Armagh IRA's campaign in England. Realistically, you could drop most of the controls with zero consequences.

I was interested to read last night that post-9/11 security theatre was the death of the International train between the US and Canada.

 

[Cloud Strife]

sorry but no this isnt that case at all, all the checks MUST be made at the boarder, "pre checks" dont work as how do you handle impersonation, you will still need in person staff for such situations who will in effect be the same border staff as at present

Of course they work. The carrier will have a hefty fine hanging over them if they get it wrong, hence they'll get it right. ETA can easily be slightly adapted to require pre-registration first, like the EES system will.

it was originally IRA yes but now its about other forms of terrorist (e.g. ISIS or extreme far right), not to mention that post brexit has the customs/anti smuggling aspect

Now it's mostly about security theatre, nothing else. If you talk to people who are involved with security on a professional level, they'll tell you that such checks are nothing but for show, because the real security is done before the person even approaches the checkpoint.

I was interested to read last night that post-9/11 security theatre was the death of the International train between the US and Canada.

Yes, it's always worth remembering that the security theatre causes a lot of economic loss in various ways.

 

[popeter45]

Of course they work. The carrier will have a hefty fine hanging over them if they get it wrong, hence they'll get it right. ETA can easily be slightly adapted to require pre-registration first, like the EES system will.



Now it's mostly about security theatre, nothing else. If you talk to people who are involved with security on a professional level, they'll tell you that such checks are nothing but for show, because the real security is done before the person even approaches the checkpoint.

I work in the field of this kind of security (not at HO but work closely with HO) and this idea it's all make pretend infuriates me so much, apart from the simple fact these checks existing is a powerful deterrent they do regularly catch stuff

And with regards to ETA you do realise the main way people will avoid fines is keeping everything as they are now? Nobody will risk anything for the sake 'innovation"

 

[SHD]

It would depend very much on who you are and how you are travelling. If you are aware of the short connection, position yourself at the front of the train and are travelling with only a hold-all sized bag and are relatively young and fleet of foot it's doable. I personally wouldn't want to allow only 5 minutes at each end to transfer, but a practiced traveller could do it.

I am a born and bred Parisian, practiced enough that I could navigate Chatelet-les-Halles after too many drinks and wearing a blindfold, and I wouldn’t consider a transfer shorter than 30 minutes between PNO/PLY, and that’s an absolute minimum.

 

[renegademaster]

In China during the strictest covid control they would tape up the doors of lorry with a seal to ensure that if doors are opened authorities know(during early 2021 I saw a Russian plated lorry on the M6 with the seals on and broken)

Surely a system like that would be used for a sleeper train. Mobile terminals at the entrance. Worker goes to tape up every exit. Arrive a folkstone yard ,a french cop wanders up and down the train, everything ok then sent through. If not then a lot of mess and everyone gets their passport checked again.


None of this will ever happen even if we joined Schengen unless the government makes air travel illegal anyway. Bar a few enthusiasts their will never be a market when a flight will be much more convenient.

 

[AlbertBeale]

In China during the strictest covid control they would tape up the doors of lorry with a seal to ensure that if doors are opened authorities know(during early 2021 I saw a Russian plated lorry on the M6 with the seals on and broken)

Surely a system like that would be used for a sleeper train. Mobile terminals at the entrance. Worker goes to tape up every exit. Arrive a folkstone yard ,a french cop wanders up and down the train, everything ok then sent through. If not then a lot of mess and everyone gets their passport checked again.


None of this will ever happen even if we joined Schengen unless the government makes air travel illegal anyway. Bar a few enthusiasts their will never be a market when a flight will be much more convenient.

In your opinion, of course. I don't find plane travel more convenient than train travel - I find it a pain in the proverbial.

By the way, even if air travel stays legal, it will surely get massively more expensive when it's forced to pay its real costs; that would swing the balance somewhat.

 

[zwk500]

In your opinion, of course. I don't find plane travel more convenient than train travel - I find it a pain in the proverbial.

That's you, but to many a direct flight is easier than a connecting train.

By the way, even if air travel stays legal, it will surely get massively more expensive when it's forced to pay its real costs; that would swing the balance somewhat.

This would be a logical and reasonable course, and therefore politicians will never force it to happen. It will face strong opposition from wmtjody who likes a cheap getaway to Spain or any Ryanair/Easyjet destination

 

[renegademaster]

In your opinion, of course. I don't find plane travel more convenient than train travel - I find it a pain in the proverbial.

By the way, even if air travel stays legal, it will surely get massively more expensive when it's forced to pay its real costs; that would swing the balance somewhat.

In the theoretical that we rejoin Schengen air travel won't be such a pain in the arse(or just the EU stop being annoying and allow us to use their egates like we do for them), and in the reality we stay out of it, a sleeper train is going to have most of the annoyingness of air travel.

I think flights would at least have to quadruple or more in price before people consider turning a 1hr flight+ 1hr of sercurity at each end into 12 hour sleeper

 

[Bald Rick]

I think flights would at least have to quadruple or more in price before people consider turning a 1hr flight+ 1hr of sercurity at each end into 12 hour sleeper

I‘d say more than quadruple. Compared to 25 years ago or so, air fares around Europe have more than halved in real terms. And 25 years ago people still wouldn’t turn a 1-2hr flight into a 12 hour sleeper.

 

[JamesT]

In the theoretical that we rejoin Schengen air travel won't be such a pain in the arse(or just the EU stop being annoying and allow us to use their egates like we do for them), and in the reality we stay out of it, a sleeper train is going to have most of the annoyingness of air travel.

I think flights would at least have to quadruple or more in price before people consider turning a 1hr flight+ 1hr of sercurity at each end into 12 hour sleeper

We can't rejoin something we were never in.

I agree that for most people, air is still going to be preferred unless it gets really expensive. The next option would likely be driving and ferry/tunnel over the train.

 

[Krokodil]

That's you, but to many a direct flight is easier than a connecting train.

We're not talking about connecting trains though, we're talking about a direct sleeper.

There's not a lot convenient about getting up at 3am to drive to the airport for a Wizzair flight, being stung not only for hold luggage, but for anything in the overhead lockers too. Getting stung for airport parking (with your car probably being dumped on some poor sod's driveway) rubbing salt into the wound.

People use them because they are cheap. Prices have risen since the low-cost boom and are likely to keep rising - particularly if multinational agreements can be made to start taxing kerosene.

Naturally the alternative to cheap flights for many people will just be to not go abroad at all, but for those in the middle sleeper services are certainly growing. I watched a video last night featuring Mark Smith among others and it was stated that Nightjet is in the black - a considerable achievement when you bear in mind that sleepers are manpower-heavy and have long been marginal or loss-making. Obviously the Austrians have got economies of scale working in their favour, and don't have complications like Channel Tunnel security to worry about. Where services cross the Schengen frontier passport checks are done onboard.

 

[renegademaster]

Would Britain-Europe sleeper trains even have much a carbon benefit over flying, the passenger density is low and the route very circuitous for anything beyond Paris,South of France or Amsterdam?

 

[RT4038]

Where services cross the Schengen frontier passport checks are done onboard.

Where do these happen exactly? With passports checks on board, rather than standing in a station? With any quantity of passengers travelling?

 

[Krokodil]

Where do these happen exactly? With passports checks on board, rather than standing in a station? With any quantity of passengers travelling?

I experienced it on the Croatian/Slovenian border, travelling on the Zagreb-Zurich sleeper. The train stopped in the station and border guards made their way from compartment to compartment, scanning passports as they went. It was still around 20:00 so we didn't need to be woken. Then repeat on the other side of the frontier.

Croatia joined Schengen at the beginning of this year so presumably this no longer happens.

Much more civilised than the Bulgarian/Turkish border. The Bulgarians will just collect up your passports and take them away to check. At the Turkish frontier on the other hand, you get turfed out of your bed in the small hours, and take your luggage to an X-ray machine.

 

[Class83]

The regular sleeper cars on the Caledonian sleeper have 10 rooms containing 20 berths, the accessible 6 rooms containing 11 berths. St Pancras platforms are apparently 455m (I'm going to assume major European terminals can cope with this, for non London UK stations only Edinburgh Waverley probably can) 22.2m vehicle length allows 20 vehicles, one will be a locomotive so 19 vehicles, for practicality lets say it's 18 cars arranged as 3 groups of 6, so Club, Accessible and 4 standard. 273 if all rooms are used at double capacity. 6 sleepers from London to various Euro destinations is 1638 passengers. Easyjet A321s carry 235 passengers, which is 7 flights for the same number of passengers.

I want to say this can work, but it really, really doesn't unless we build a huge amount of infrastructure or tax flying out of all recognition, basically 2 planes, for the length of flights in question can move the same number of people. Another plane can do a couple of trips Edinburgh/Manchester to Paris/Brussels and match capacity there.

 

[popeter45]

The regular sleeper cars on the Caledonian sleeper have 10 rooms containing 20 berths, the accessible 6 rooms containing 11 berths. St Pancras platforms are apparently 455m (I'm going to assume major European terminals can cope with this, for non London UK stations only Edinburgh Waverley probably can) 22.2m vehicle length allows 20 vehicles, one will be a locomotive so 19 vehicles, for practicality lets say it's 18 cars arranged as 3 groups of 6, so Club, Accessible and 4 standard. 273 if all rooms are used at double capacity. 6 sleepers from London to various Euro destinations is 1638 passengers. Easyjet A321s carry 235 passengers, which is 7 flights for the same number of passengers.

I want to say this can work, but it really, really doesn't unless we build a huge amount of infrastructure or tax flying out of all recognition, basically 2 planes, for the length of flights in question can move the same number of people. Another plane can do a couple of trips Edinburgh/Manchester to Paris/Brussels and match capacity there.

you can use berne gauge stock so it could 26.4m coaches, 15 carriages + a class 92 or equivalent, 3 x 5 carriages made up of 1 sleeper, 3 couchette and 1 seated, thats 108 total beds assimuming triple bunks (3xWLABmz with 27 beds each), 486 couchette bunks assuming again triple bunks (9xBcmz with 54 bunks each) and 198 seats (3xBmz with 66 seats each) for a total of 774 passengers per train, your 6 trains would be 4644 passengers

 

[Krokodil]

The regular sleeper cars on the Caledonian sleeper have 10 rooms containing 20 berths, the accessible 6 rooms containing 11 berths. St Pancras platforms are apparently 455m (I'm going to assume major European terminals can cope with this, for non London UK stations only Edinburgh Waverley probably can) 22.2m vehicle length allows 20 vehicles, one will be a locomotive so 19 vehicles, for practicality lets say it's 18 cars arranged as 3 groups of 6, so Club, Accessible and 4 standard. 273 if all rooms are used at double capacity. 6 sleepers from London to various Euro destinations is 1638 passengers. Easyjet A321s carry 235 passengers, which is 7 flights for the same number of passengers.

you can use berne gauge stock so it could 26.4m coaches, 15 carriages + a class 92 or equivalent, 3 x 5 carriages made up of 1 sleeper, 3 couchette and 1 seated, thats 108 total beds assimuming triple bunks (3xWLABmz with 27 beds each), 486 couchette bunks assuming again triple bunks (9xBcmz with 54 bunks each) and 198 seats (3xBmz with 66 seats each) for a total of 774 passengers per train, your 6 trains would be 4644 passengers

A new generation Nightjet fixed-formation half-set consists of two seated coaches, three couchettes and two sleepers, total 254 passengers, so 508 once formed up. Altogether, 14 coaches + 2*92 (top and tail through the tunnel). Obviously you don't have to order those specific formations but it's a good guide to what the dominant operator uses. Nightstar's NoL half-sets sets would have been seven coach fixed-formations, in this case three sleepers, three seated coaches, and a service car (six berth couchettes wouldn't have fitted the UK loading gauge). I'm sure that the Nightstar plan for a half-set each to Plymouth and Swansea was probably a bit optimistic.

If Eurostar seriously wanted to get back into this (probably needing government backing), they would be well advised to start by running a 374 overnight to test the water. London-Amsterdam is long enough, as would London-Frankfurt (something Eurostar ought to be running anyway).

 

[popeter45]

A new generation Nightjet fixed-formation half-set consists of two seated coaches, three couchettes and two sleepers, total 254 passengers, so 508 once formed up. Altogether, 14 coaches + 2*92 (top and tail through the tunnel). Obviously you don't have to order those specific formations but it's a good guide to what the dominant operator uses. Nightstar's NoL half-sets sets would have been seven coach fixed-formations, in this case three sleepers, three seated coaches, and a service car (six berth couchettes wouldn't have fitted the UK loading gauge). I'm sure that the Nightstar plan for a half-set each to Plymouth and Swansea was probably a bit optimistic.

If Eurostar seriously wanted to get back into this (probably needing government backing), they would be well advised to start by running a 374 overnight to test the water. London-Amsterdam is long enough, as would London-Frankfurt (something Eurostar ought to be running anyway).

not 6 berth but for sure 4 berth could fit UK loading gauge, its mostly historic prefrence as to why we dont have couchettes in the UK (thou they do exist on the royal train for staff), would need sliding doors or a modification of OBB's pod concept to fit the density

also you can get some extra space by only adding the rear loco at the tunnel rather at st pancras