should extra rolling stock be invested to get prepared for TEE 2.0 project?

[Stephen Lee]

Anyone still have image on this doc? I wondered if extra rolling stock needs to be invested for DB, OBB, SBB etc. to meet those needs?

https://www.bmvi.de/SharedDocs/EN/Documents/E/concept-tee-2-0.pdf?__blob=publicationFile

Objectives for the blueprint of a Europe overnight train network
• Identify possible rolling stock and production blueprints for the lines
identified
• Identify the necessary planning steps for the way forward
Planning bases for overnight train lines
• Maximum speed 160 – 230 km/h (Talgo: 250 km/h)
• Existing overnight trains operating satisfactorily (Austria/Switzerland –
Germany) will not be re-addressed. Rather, it will be assumed that they
will be evolved and continue to operate
The development of additional overnight trains is to be welcomed, but their
economic challenge is not to be underestimated: sleeping berths can only be
sold once per journey, whereas on TEE 2.0 trains, it will be possible to market
one seat several times for shorter journeys. In addition, the space required per
passenger is significantly greater.

Requirements to be met by the rolling stock
• Superior level of comfort
• Seats facing the direction of travel
• Catering incl. sophisticated restaurant car
• International operation

 

[Fragezeichnen]

No one can possibly answer this question. It is just a vague political idea.

 

[DanielB]

Still, when simply considering which rolling stock is available for the current services it's simple to conclude that rolling stock investments will be needed should the ideas from the presentation become reality.
Just have a look at the services mentioned to/from The Netherlands: those are significant extensions to current routes, but the fleet of ICE's and TGV's capable of running into The Netherlands is already fairly small today.

And I'm sure that will also apply to other countries, depending on the exact requirements to the rolling stock over there.

 

[StephenHunter]

No one can possibly answer this question. It is just a vague political idea.

I'd say it was a well-defined idea from the biggest national government in EU... so that helps a lot.

 

[Stephen Lee]

Still, when simply considering which rolling stock is available for the current services it's simple to conclude that rolling stock investments will be needed should the ideas from the presentation become reality.
Just have a look at the services mentioned to/from The Netherlands: those are significant extensions to current routes, but the fleet of ICE's and TGV's capable of running into The Netherlands is already fairly small today.

And I'm sure that will also apply to other countries, depending on the exact requirements to the rolling stock over there.

Or maybe existing rolling stock with clearance to specific countries, like ICE/TGV to Austria/Czech Republic/Poland, Railjet to Slovenia/croatia

Still, when simply considering which rolling stock is available for the current services it's simple to conclude that rolling stock investments will be needed should the ideas from the presentation become reality.
Just have a look at the services mentioned to/from The Netherlands: those are significant extensions to current routes, but the fleet of ICE's and TGV's capable of running into The Netherlands is already fairly small today.

And I'm sure that will also apply to other countries, depending on the exact requirements to the rolling stock over there.

Or maybe existing rolling stock with clearance to specific countries, like ICE/TGV to Austria/Czech Republic/Poland, Railjet to Slovenia/croatia

 

[Giugiaro]

The plans start by using already existing rolling stock, with small modifications added to quell some missing gaps on their interoperability capabilities.
Most of the proposed routes are repurposed or extended existing services, so the domestic fleets we currently have should suffice.

New rolling stock may be invested in the future as the network further expands and becomes more established.
That, however, won't be supported by the EU as, per current EU Commission comments, they are very averse to public investment on railway operations.
Especially overnight international ones.

 

[Gag Halfrunt]

There's an organisation called Trains for Europe which is campaigning for the EU to support procurement of new night train stock.

The problem: the companies that could provide international night trains in Europe (Deutsche Bahn, SNCF, Trenitalia, Renfe, PKP etc.) currently have no intention of doing so, while the smaller companies that would like to provide these services (RegioJet, European Sleeper, Snälltåget etc.) do not have the means to do so.

There are very few night train carriages (rolling stock) available on the leasing market, and what is available is often very old.

So the way to scale up night trains is to procure new carriages, and to allow operators to lease these.

This is a Europe-wide problem – as pretty much all the important and viable night train routes are cross-border. Hence we demand that the European Union steps in to solve the problem – the EU has to set up the framework to allow the procurement of a fleet of new night trains.

Trains for Europe is not a train company, but a campaign. It is not about why night trains are a good idea, but about how to scale them up. It is founded by Jon Worth, long time blogger and commentator on EU transport policy and is independent of all railway companies and operators. The priority is that new night train connections run, not who it is that runs them.

 

[Stephen Lee]

The plans start by using already existing rolling stock, with small modifications added to quell some missing gaps on their interoperability capabilities.
Most of the proposed routes are repurposed or extended existing services, so the domestic fleets we currently have should suffice.

New rolling stock may be invested in the future as the network further expands and becomes more established.
That, however, won't be supported by the EU as, per current EU Commission comments, they are very averse to public investment on railway operations.
Especially overnight international ones.

The plans start by using already existing rolling stock, with small modifications added to quell some missing gaps on their interoperability capabilities.
Most of the proposed routes are repurposed or extended existing services, so the domestic fleets we currently have should suffice.

New rolling stock may be invested in the future as the network further expands and becomes more established.
That, however, won't be supported by the EU as, per current EU Commission comments, they are very averse to public investment on railway operations.
Especially overnight international ones.

How do you know some routes are repurposed/extended existing services? And which routes are those?

 

[StephenHunter]

How do you know some routes are repurposed/extended existing services? And which routes are those?

The London to Amsterdam one is the current Eurostar operation, for one thing and it says as such on the proposal.

 

[Austriantrain]

How do you know some routes are repurposed/extended existing services? And which routes are those?

The (German) presentation of the TEE 2.0 concept can be found here:

https://assets.ctfassets.net/scbs508bajse/VEJGqGEVLmdUu4sfNkEhx/999e7eaee5fcb002cb7617dc6f8b1191/eu-ratspraesidentschaft-innovative-schiene-nachtverkehr-21-09-2020.pdf

Although it is in German, the maps and itineraries are easily understandable and you will see that many routes either already exist, are simple cross border extensions of existing domestic services or are a combination of two or more existing domestic services.

Also, TEE 2.0 is anything but a concrete proposal. It is a political idea launched by Germany and no one knows what, if any of it will ever be put into practice. the countries most interested in it - mainly in Central Europe - already have decent international services and for the rest, I am not sure what should motivate them to follow through, except a huge injection of EU money, which I don’t see coming as operating support (if anything, the EU will co-Finance rail infrastructure).

 

[StephenHunter]

The incoming German government definitely seems to be rail-friendly from what I've seen about the coalition agreement.

 

[Austriantrain]

The incoming German government definitely seems to be rail-friendly from what I've seen about the coalition agreement.

Even so, they will need cooperation from other countries, so I wouldn’t hold my breath. Especially as TEE 2.0 is largely a marketing exercise anyway and each and every proposal will be judged on its merits. And besides, in many parts of Europe the status of international rail travel is not so bad as is often implied.

 

[Stephen Lee]

Even so, they will need cooperation from other countries, so I wouldn’t hold my breath. Especially as TEE 2.0 is largely a marketing exercise anyway and each and every proposal will be judged on its merits. And besides, in many parts of Europe the status of international rail travel is not so bad as is often implied.

Is it better to establish the TEE 2.0 alliance which consists of national railway companies like DB, ÖBB, SBB/CFF/FFS, TI, NMBS/SNCB, CFL, NS, SNCF, PKP, ČD, ZSSK, MÀV-START, SZ, HZ, RENFE, CP, DSB, SJ, NSB with open-access operators like FLIXTRAIN, RegioJet, LEO Express, NTV, Snalltaget to join the game if possible

How do you know some routes are repurposed/extended existing services? And which routes are those?

But I wondered if a Stuttgart-Zurich-Milano TEE should be established? If Yes, by repurposed/extended existing services or just start a new service?