P&O Ferries to permanently stop accepting foot passengers on their Dover to Calais route.

[AdamWW]

Even taking in to account the subsequent reductions in terminals and Brexit Eurostar is at nowhere near the available infrastructure capacity.

From https://www.euronews.com/travel/202...ks for British travellers,drop by 30 per cent.

But still, peak capacity through the stations is now around 30 per cent lower than it was before Brexit, the Eurostar chief says.

“Even with all booths manned, St Pancras can currently process a maximum 1,500 passengers per hour vs. 2200 in 2019.”

He goes on to add that the restricted timetables and limited capacity trains that have been running post-Brexit are the only way that the company can avoid daily queues in the centre of London.

I would argue this is saying that they are in fact very near the available infrastructure capacity.

But perhaps in a thread about P&O foot passengers I shouldn't.

 

[zwk500]

I would argue this is saying that they are in fact very near the available infrastructure capacity.

Eurostar are near the passenger capacity at St Pancras, but nowhere near the rail infrastructure capacity on HS1.

 

[AlbertBeale]

Eurostar are near the passenger capacity at St Pancras, but nowhere near the rail infrastructure capacity on HS1.

Even if there is unmet demand, what's the incentive for Eurostar to run extra services (from eg Stratford/Ashford, not serving St P at all) to increase capacity, rather than just stay at St P only and ration by price? Given the simplicity and lesser cost of running from only one British terminal, the latter might be just as profitable?

 

[zwk500]

Even if there is unmet demand, what's the incentive for Eurostar to run extra services (from eg Stratford/Ashford, not serving St P at all) to increase capacity, rather than just stay at St P only and ration by price? Given the simplicity and lesser cost of running from only one British terminal, the latter might be just as profitable?

You wouldn't start short. The economic incentive for stopping trains at Ebbsfleet and Ashford was always dodgy, hence the bunfight over Ashford's platforms when the e320s came in. Ashford was more political then Ebbsfleet (M25 parkway traffic was substantive, IIRC) but both were less profitable than operating trains full from London.

 

[paul1609]

Eurostar are near the passenger capacity at St Pancras, but nowhere near the rail infrastructure capacity on HS1.

Eurostar are nowhere near the total capacity of St Pancras. Its only peak capacity that has been reduced.
The Paris service is currently 1 an hour in the peak with two hourly gaps during the day.
The Brussels/ Amsterdam service is basically every 2hours with a 3 hour gap.
The current service is entirely based on the profitability of the services.

 

[Trainbike46]

I can't, well not without a major change in attitudes that goes way beyond Schenegen.
The only way that a service would make sense would be if the Pas de Calais was opened up as cheap housing for London.
That would need major development, the existing housing stock just isn't sufficient. Im not entirely convinced that the French would be entirely happy being the new East End.
If we go by the commuting patterns on southeastern, post WFH and pandemic Calais would be too far away anyway.


Sorry that's not correct the Channel Tunnel was designed to take up to 8 Eurostars in each direction every hour. The reality is that HS1 south of Ashford is known as the Tumbleweed Line. Don't even mention the missing rail freight.

The limitation on the amount of trains eurostar runs isn't at the channel tunnel, but at passport control and the St Pancras terminal. Some have expressed hope that ETIAS will improve things, but others have pointed out that may worsen the situation.

This is also a challenge for any potential eurostar competitors; What would their UK terminal be? St Pancras doesn't have space, and eurostar is unlikely to be willing to give up space that they do genuinely use and need.

 

[Bletchleyite]

The limitation on the amount of trains eurostar runs isn't at the channel tunnel, but at passport control and the St Pancras terminal. Some have expressed hope that ETIAS will improve things, but others have pointed out that may worsen the situation.

This is also a challenge for any potential eurostar competitors; What would their UK terminal be? St Pancras doesn't have space, and eurostar is unlikely to be willing to give up space that they do genuinely use and need.

I wouldn't get fixated on on-rail competition for Eurostar. The competitors have wings and are mostly either orange or blue and yellow. They are a bit different to the UK domestic rail network where the main competitor has rubber tyres and a steering wheel, which explains why their fares approach differs substantially from UK domestic.

 

[Trainbike46]

Eurostar are nowhere near the total capacity of St Pancras. Its only peak capacity that has been reduced.
The Paris service is currently 1 an hour in the peak with two hourly gaps during the day.
The Brussels/ Amsterdam service is basically every 2hours with a 3 hour gap.
The current service is entirely based on the profitability of the services.

Current capacity is 1500 passengers per hour

1 Paris tph is either 750 or 900 passengers ph
1/2 Brussels/Amsterdam tph is another 450 passengers ph on average

1350 is pretty close to 1500, and you missed out there is in fact some extra Paris trains in addition to the hourly pattern, so overall they are running at terminal capacity, and you can see that by the queues at St P

I wouldn't get fixated on on-rail competition for Eurostar. The competitors have wings and are mostly either orange or blue and yellow. They are a bit different to the UK domestic rail network where the main competitor has rubber tyres and a steering wheel, which explains why their fares approach differs substantially from UK domestic.

True that

 

[AdamWW]

Current capacity is 1500 passengers per hour

1 Paris tph is either 750 or 900 passengers ph
1 Brussels/Amsterdam tph is another 450 passengers ph on average

1350 is pretty close to 1500, and you missed out there is in fact some extra Paris trains in addition to the hourly pattern, so overall they are running at terminal capacity, and you can see that by the queues at St P


True that

There's a another big difference, surely?

Eurostar acts like an open access operator does with UK domestic rail, in that it can choose service frequency and fares. Very little domestic rail travel operates in that manner.

Airlines and cross-channel ferries also do, of course.

 

[fandroid]

This is also a challenge for any potential eurostar competitors; What would their UK terminal be? St Pancras doesn't have space, and eurostar is unlikely to be willing to give up space that they do genuinely use and need.

There is another London station at Stratford. Presumably it was built with room for passport facilities. Other operators could use that, just running trains empty between there and St Pancras if they cannot change lines at Stratford. Places like Lille manage to have passengers interchanging with through trains (as did Ebbsfleet and Ashford) so what are the practical reasons for not using Stratford as a London "terminus"?

Also as there are few incoming controls actually at St. Pancras, trains could discharge there and then take on new passengers at Stratford.

 

[zwk500]

There is another London station at Stratford. Presumably it was built with room for passport facilities. Other operators could use that, just running trains empty between there and St Pancras if they cannot change lines at Stratford. Places like Lille manage to have passengers interchanging with through trains (as did Ebbsfleet and Ashford) so what are the practical reasons for not using Stratford as a London "terminus"?

1. Cost 2. Capacity (track and passenger facilities). I highly doubt any operator will want to contribute the full amount to fit out Stratford International, and also doubt that Stratford was built with a departure lounge sufficient to take a full train's worth (800-900 people). You've also got to get people out to Stratford. If you're running a train in and out of St Pancras, you want people to be on board it as St Pancras commands the more traffic.

Also as there are few incoming controls actually at St. Pancras, trains could discharge there and then take on new passengers at Stratford.

Again, this means skipping your biggest market for very little gain.

Neither of these situations will result in lower prices for cross-channel travel. If a OuiGo type operation was to be attempted, Running Ebbsfleet-Calais-Lille would be far and away the most sensible option. It would also depend whether the new operator was bound by the same condition Eurostar is against selling tickets for travel between 2 stations in the same company.

 

[paul1609]

There is another London station at Stratford. Presumably it was built with room for passport facilities. Other operators could use that, just running trains empty between there and St Pancras if they cannot change lines at Stratford. Places like Lille manage to have passengers interchanging with through trains (as did Ebbsfleet and Ashford) so what are the practical reasons for not using Stratford as a London "terminus"?

Also as there are few incoming controls actually at St. Pancras, trains could discharge there and then take on new passengers at Stratford.

Surely it would make sense to first run trains departing St Pancras in the 1 hr 30 mins gaps where there are currently no departures during lunchtime and the early afternoon and then look at the times when there's only 1 train per hour departing.
As I see it St Pancras is at full capacity about 2 hours in the morning and the same in the evening, the rest of the time there's plenty of terminal capacity. Its just that Eurostar don't want to run trains then because they wouldn't be profitable.

 

[AlbertBeale]

1. Cost 2. Capacity (track and passenger facilities). I highly doubt any operator will want to contribute the full amount to fit out Stratford International, and also doubt that Stratford was built with a departure lounge sufficient to take a full train's worth (800-900 people). You've also got to get people out to Stratford. If you're running a train in and out of St Pancras, you want people to be on board it as St Pancras commands the more traffic.

If it were possible to get lower prices at shorter notice, by using a service starting from Stratford (or maybe Ashford), I'd be game. I'm sure there'd be a market.

It's true that to start from Stratford the track layout requires running empty to St P and back* - but that shouldn't be a capacity problem? (*Unless the gaps in other services are such that there's time, after unloading, to go forward into the tunnel to St P, reverse via the up domestic platform and a crossover onto the down line in the tunnel at the other end, and then reverse a second time into the international down platform.)

 

[paul1609]

When Eurostars have terminated at Ashford in an emergency before it has taken hours to clear the incoming passengers because the domestic London services both HS1 and Mainline dont have enough spare capacity. Stratford International would be even worse when the entire train of Eurostar passengers tried to walk through Westfield or squeeze on to the DLR. If you wanted to offer a cheaper tunnel service youd be much better utilising the off peak unused slots that absolutely do exist at St Pancras.

 

[zwk500]

If it were possible to get lower prices at shorter notice, by using a service starting from Stratford (or maybe Ashford), I'd be game. I'm sure there'd be a market.

Honestly if people want low prices at short notice to cross the channel use Flixbus. Trains are never going to compete against the coach on price.

It's true that to start from Stratford the track layout requires running empty to St P and back* - but that shouldn't be a capacity problem? (*Unless the gaps in other services are such that there's time, after unloading, to go forward into the tunnel to St P, reverse via the up domestic platform and a crossover onto the down line in the tunnel at the other end, and then reverse a second time into the international down platform.)

It's not so much the capacity of the track, it's why would you miss out such a massive market if you are running the train into the station anyway? Although I suspect the additional track access charges won't help the business proposition.

 

[30907]

Surely it would make sense to first run trains departing St Pancras in the 1 hr 30 mins gaps where there are currently no departures during lunchtime and the early afternoon and then look at the times when there's only 1 train per hour departing.
As I see it St Pancras is at full capacity about 2 hours in the morning and the same in the evening, the rest of the time there's plenty of terminal capacity. Its just that Eurostar don't want to run trains then because they wouldn't be profitable.

At 1500 pax/hr, looking at a Tuesday mid-March, there is room for departures at 11.30 (runs on various dates anyway), 13.30 and sometime around 1900; interestingly, the date I chose had several trains that don't show in RTT and at least one (0901 to Brussels 14 March) with very low fares suggesting it has been added to the the timetable in response to demand.

 

[WAB]

It's not so much the capacity of the track, it's why would you miss out such a massive market if you are running the train into the station anyway? Although I suspect the additional track access charges won't help the business proposition.

If you could undercut Eurostar, people would be more than happy to go to Stratford. These days, it's hardly the middle of nowhere, particularly now that Crossrail is open nearby.

 

[zwk500]

If you could undercut Eurostar, people would be more than happy to go to Stratford. These days, it's hardly the middle of nowhere, particularly now that Crossrail is open nearby.

Big if. The majority of the costs of a cross-channel operation would be related to the tunnel and borders, which starting at Stratford isn't going to help with.

 

[Route115?]

Isn't the discussion missing the fact that life is difficult if you want to make a local journey across the Channel without a car. It could be that someone should set up a cycle hire business (with very large panniers - bicycles and luggage don't go together) or a Eurlines needs to sell Dover - Calais tickets. I remember that many years ago Connex used to sell tickets to Calais for £15 including a round trip on the shuttle. It obviously lost money as it stopped but could be very useful for the inhabitants of Kent.

 

[paul1609]

Isn't the discussion missing the fact that life is difficult if you want to make a local journey across the Channel without a car. It could be that someone should set up a cycle hire business (with very large panniers - bicycles and luggage don't go together) or a Eurlines needs to sell Dover - Calais tickets. I remember that many years ago Connex used to sell tickets to Calais for £15 including a round trip on the shuttle. It obviously lost money as it stopped but could be very useful for the inhabitants of Kent.

Fact is that once you get out of the metropolitan areas there's very few people that don't have access to a car. The early morning shuttle fares are such that its a no-brainer for a short period trip across the channel for people who live local to the terminals. Its not helped by the fact that the "nice' places on the other side aren't easily accessed by public transport.

 

[zwk500]

Isn't the discussion missing the fact that life is difficult if you want to make a local journey across the Channel without a car. It could be that someone should set up a cycle hire business (with very large panniers - bicycles and luggage don't go together) or a Eurlines needs to sell Dover - Calais tickets. I remember that many years ago Connex used to sell tickets to Calais for £15 including a round trip on the shuttle. It obviously lost money as it stopped but could be very useful for the inhabitants of Kent.

So who pays for it? I'm presuming you don't support raising the fare to the economic rate and therefore either subsidy or external funding would be required to cover the difference in costs.

 

[aavm]

Back in the day, before the tunnel, The Sun used to have a "day trips to France for a £1" promotions (plus an add on for the train from London).

Early start, sitting on the deck of the ferry in the fresh sea air, wonder around Calais, some cheap alcohol for the trip home. Did it several times. Great day out.

But the "London to France by train and ferry" tickets ended with the tunnel. Shame.

 

[zwk500]

But the "London to France by train and ferry" tickets ended with the tunnel. Shame.

As stated quite a few times in this thread, no they didn't. They lasted for about 10 years after the tunnel opened and stopped because they weren't selling any.

 

[AlbertBeale]

Fact is that once you get out of the metropolitan areas there's very few people that don't have access to a car. The early morning shuttle fares are such that its a no-brainer for a short period trip across the channel for people who live local to the terminals. Its not helped by the fact that the "nice' places on the other side aren't easily accessed by public transport.

What's "very few"? Millions of people I'd say. Or do you have a source that says otherwise?

 

[paul1609]

What's "very few"? Millions of people I'd say. Or do you have a source that says otherwise?

I live about 60 miles by road from Charing Cross. The last bus from my railhead Rye is 18.00 which means the last train departure I can get from London is around 16.40 from St Pancras. The last bus is earlier on Saturdays and there is no bus service on Sundays or Bank Holidays. This is very common in Kent and East Sussex which is the area that the OP was referring to. By rural areas standards that's actually not a bad service.
Even towns and cities in Kent generally only have a very skeleton bus service. The reality is that if you work full time you need a car and to be able to drive.
In my village there are some people who don't have access to cars but they generally are either elderly and have given up their car or youngsters who are ferried around by their parents. There are half a dozen families who can't afford a car and are either picked up for work or rely on the bus but their income profile is such that they are not going to spend money on Cross Chanel leisure trips.
That is the reality of life outside of London and the other Metropolitan Areas.

 

[zwk500]

What's "very few"? Millions of people I'd say. Or do you have a source that says otherwise?

Some interesting data in this website:

Number of Cars in the UK 2024

There were 33,187,308 cars registered in the UK at the end of 2022. See how the number of cars has increased over the past 25 years, and how many cars are in the average household in the UK.

www.nimblefins.co.uk

In England overall, 20.7% of households don't have a car. This number is a bit skewed by London, where 41.8% of households have no car. If we consider households outside of London then 16.7% don't have a car. In other words, 1 in 6 households outside of London don't drive.

Of course, household not having a car does not mean the household cannot access a car (parents, friends, renting etc)

 

[paul1609]

Some interesting data in this website:

Number of Cars in the UK 2024

There were 33,187,308 cars registered in the UK at the end of 2022. See how the number of cars has increased over the past 25 years, and how many cars are in the average household in the UK.

www.nimblefins.co.uk

Of course, household not having a car does not mean the household cannot access a car (parents, friends, renting etc)

I suspect that if in addition to London you took out the Metropolitan areas (manchester, Merseyside, Tyneside Birmingham and the Central Belt etc) the figure of no car is very low indeed.

 

[AlbertBeale]

I suspect that if in addition to London you took out the Metropolitan areas (manchester, Merseyside, Tyneside Birmingham and the Central Belt etc) the figure of no car is very low indeed.

These household figures aren't the same as people. A household having a car doesn't mean that everyone in it can use it - unless they're always all travelling together. The proportion of people without use of a car is greater than the proportion of households without one - and clearly both figures run into the millions. Hence not really "very few".

 

[ashkeba]

I suspect that if in addition to London you took out the Metropolitan areas (manchester, Merseyside, Tyneside Birmingham and the Central Belt etc) the figure of no car is very low indeed.

Go on, then. I suspect you may be surprised how many travel to work from rural areas by multiple modes or as passengers, but could not drive a car to the ferry or tunnel. Many are not allowed to drive due to health problems or past driving offences and they don't all stop working.

 

[RT4038]

Go on, then. I suspect you may be surprised how many travel to work from rural areas by multiple modes or as passengers, but could not drive a car to the ferry or tunnel. Many are not allowed to drive due to health problems or past driving offences and they don't all stop working.

But then take away all those who have no intention or desire to travel across the Channel, or who are happy with E* service, and that leaves not much....