"What if" Scenario, regarding Irish Sea Tunnel

[GrimsbyPacer]

The plan to build a very expensive rail tunnel to link Scotland and Ireland has been found to not be value for money and the scheme scrapped, so it's never going to happen.
But let's just assume the UK Government wasted money (wouldn't be the first time), and splashed £300 billion to build a Belfast to Stranraer line via a tunnel, with a re-opened line linking up to Carlisle, all for the sake of trying to "save the union" at all costs.
Also assume it's all electrified dual track, and it was amazingly built in just 10 years.

What would the train service patterns likely have been? Busy or lightly used? Would passengers in Belfast still use the plane to Glasgow or Manchester? Would the ferry firms survive? Would the link have improved the economy anywhere or not?
Many thanks

 

[SynthD]

The channel tunnel didn’t end the English Channel ferries. People wanted the view, the tunnel refused chemicals.

You point out Glasgow, perhaps there would be vocal demand, but not passenger numbers, for a fast connection to there and Edinburgh, and to the ecml in England.

Folkestone has moved up in the world but I wouldn’t expect a Dunragit Triennial.

 

[6Gman]

The plan to build a very expensive rail tunnel to link Scotland and Ireland has been found to not be value for money and the scheme scrapped, so it's never going to happen.
But let's just assume the UK Government wasted money (wouldn't be the first time), and splashed £300 billion to build a Belfast to Stranraer line via a tunnel, with a re-opened line linking up to Carlisle, all for the sake of trying to "save the union" at all costs.
Also assume it's all electrified dual track, and it was amazingly built in just 10 years.

What would the train service patterns likely have been? Busy or lightly used? Would passengers in Belfast still use the plane to Glasgow or Manchester? Would the ferry firms survive? Would the link have improved the economy anywhere or not?
Many thanks

Personal view:

There would have been a "headline" London - Belfast service which would have been even less popular than the (equally political) North Wales - Cardiff service (or the equally political Anglesey-Cardiff air service).
Direct Glasgow-Belfast services might manage half-decent loadings. No, actually, make that quarter-decent.

There could be some decently loaded freight.

Air would still dominate the passenger market. The ferries, if they lost a fair chunk of the lorry trade, could well struggle.

Hard to see any great economic benefit to anyone. Though a few small towns (e.g. Castle Douglas and Newton Stewart) might enjoy their new link to Dumfries and Carlisle.

 

[Bald Rick]

In such a scenario, London to Belfast would be roughly the same time journey as London - Glasgow. On that basis, you would expect it to pick up roughly the same proportion of passengers in the air / rail market. Plus it would pick up some from road / ferry, as it would be comparatively more attractive by rail than the equivalent trade off to Glasgow.

Probably a total of around 1m passengers a year, or 1400 each way a day. Probably enough for an hourly service from London (with intermediate stops, obviously).

The Belfast - Glasgow / Edinburgh air market combined is less than half the size of Belfast - London, I don’t know what the ferry market is though. So perhaps an hourly service to Glasgow.

 

[BayPaul]

Personal view:

There would have been a "headline" London - Belfast service which would have been even less popular than the (equally political) North Wales - Cardiff service (or the equally political Anglesey-Cardiff air service).
Direct Glasgow-Belfast services might manage half-decent loadings. No, actually, make that quarter-decent.

There could be some decently loaded freight.

Air would still dominate the passenger market. The ferries, if they lost a fair chunk of the lorry trade, could well struggle.

Hard to see any great economic benefit to anyone. Though a few small towns (e.g. Castle Douglas and Newton Stewart) might enjoy their new link to Dumfries and Carlisle.

The freight is an interesting one. Ferries from Birkenhead and Heysham to Northern Ireland take a lot of freight now, as the drive to Cairnryan is so long. Presumably this wouldn't change much with a tunnel.

I wonder if there would be Brexit busting France - Republic of Ireland bonded rail freight via Folkestone and Stranraer (I know that a gauge change would be needed). It's a big market that would probably be quite suitable for rail freight.

 

[Austriantrain]

In such a scenario, London to Belfast would be roughly the same time journey as London - Glasgow. On that basis, you would expect it to pick up roughly the same proportion of passengers in the air / rail market. Plus it would pick up some from road / ferry, as it would be comparatively more attractive by rail than the equivalent trade off to Glasgow.

Probably a total of around 1m passengers a year, or 1400 each way a day. Probably enough for an hourly service from London (with intermediate stops, obviously).

The Belfast - Glasgow / Edinburgh air market combined is less than half the size of Belfast - London, I don’t know what the ferry market is though. So perhaps an hourly service to Glasgow.

So not too different from the passenger service through Eurotunnel.

 

[BayPaul]

So not too different from the passenger service through Eurotunnel.

The one big advantage it would have over euro tunnel (and I'm not for a moment saying it is worth doing, is that without passport and security checks, trains could stop at intermediate stations as needed. That would make a greater variety of local and semi fast services much more practical as they could be extended through to Belfast. Leeds to Belfast via the Settle and Carlisle anyone?

 

[mike57]

The gauge change at the Belfast end would limit the possibilities of any onward services from Belfast without variable gauge units, which then means dedicated stock. If this had/is going ahead (and I think it would be a total waste of money) then wouldnt the sensible approach be to run the freight/car shuttle from the M74 at the Scotland end, which would solve the road problem. 90mph/100mph similar to Eurotunnel for the car/HGV shuttle, line from WCML across SW Scotland would be 125mph passenger, so there should be enough paths. Existing line towards Glasgow would need upgrading.

Seeing as we in 'speculative' mode, reopen/new build rest of Waverly route to the WCML junction with the new NI line and shuttle terminal which would probably be around Gretna to give direct access to Edinburgh.

 

[Bald Rick]

Seeing as we in 'speculative' mode, reopen/new build rest of Waverly route to the WCML junction with the new NI line and shuttle terminal which would probably be around Gretna to give direct access to Edinburgh.

it would surely be quicker via the WCML and Carstairs, and for that sort of long distance journey speed matters. (Leaving aside the billion quid extra it would cost to provide)

 

[mike57]

it would surely be quicker via the WCML and Carstairs, and for that sort of long distance journey speed matters. (Leaving aside the billion quid extra it would cost to provide)

I agree, I was slightly in tounge in cheek mode, as I know that the Waverley route is missed by many, I was just trying to give it a new lease of life....

Another issue which hasn't been aired is what if Scotland leaves the Union but NI remains in it (not an impossible scenario). If the funding had come mainly from England I could imagine the wranglings that would result will make Brexit look like a gentle tea party. Then Scotland rejoins the EU, but England remains firmly out, even after another referendum (all this is speculation, but is well with in the 'could happen' possibilities). It would be a mess at every level.

At a political level I dont think any English politician from any of the current parties would be prepared to sink the sort of money into the project that would be needed even if it meant sacrificing Northern Ireland, but this is getting well off the original topic.

 

[miklcct]

The channel tunnel didn’t end the English Channel ferries. People wanted the view, the tunnel refused chemicals.

This is not true around the world. The 3 cross harbour tunnels have ended all vehicular ferries in Hong Kong except those for dangerous materials, and decimated the passenger ferry market that the remaining operators are struggling.

 

[M&NEJ]

If Scotland were to leave the Union but Northern Ireland remain then there would be a parallel with the Channel Tunnel, that is, different political administrations and hence different railway authorities at each end of the tunnel. So just as we ended up with "Eurotunnel" and "Eurostar", would we have a dedicated operator for the Irish tunnel and no open access operations? It seems to me that could have a big impact on the service pattern.

 

[Chester1]

If Scotland were to leave the Union but Northern Ireland remain then there would be a parallel with the Channel Tunnel, that is, different political administrations and hence different railway authorities at each end of the tunnel. So just as we ended up with "Eurotunnel" and "Eurostar", would we have a dedicated operator for the Irish tunnel and no open access operations? It seems to me that could have a big impact on the service pattern.

The impact on services would depend on passport control situation. Controls would encourage fewer but longer trains as per Eurostar. This would more likely be an issue if Ireland united. There would be significant downsides of a passport border on land but few between two islands. In the event of a united Ireland it wouldn't change overnight. However, the Common Travel Area would lack a rationale and it would frankly be a bit odd for Ireland to share a passportless travel area with a non EU member instead of participating in the EUs passportless travel area. This situation is currently a practical necessity to avoid passport controls between Northern Ireland and the Republic of Ireland. A united Ireland or independent Scotland with the CTA would like just mean a shared ToC for cross border services.

While its extremely obvious that a tunnel won't be viable anytime soon, I am skeptical about it costing £200bn+. How can about 80 miles of HS railway across countryside and a tunnel about 50% longer than the channel tunnel (to avoid Beaufort Dyke) cost that much?

 

[Bald Rick]

While its extremely obvious that a tunnel won't be viable anytime soon, I am skeptical about it costing £200bn+. How can about 80 miles of HS railway across countryside and a tunnel about 50% longer than the channel tunnel (to avoid Beaufort Dyke) cost that much?

It would be a tunnel like no other. Very, very difficult to build.

 

[Chester1]

It would be a tunnel like no other. Very, very difficult to build.

Forgive my ignorance but if the option of a 33 mile tunnel from Cairnryan was chosen in order to bend around the Beaufort Dyke, it would be a cost of over £5bn a mile! How is this cost possible? Wasn’t the channel tunnel single figure billions in early 1990s for all 23 miles?

 

[stuu]

The gauge change at the Belfast end would limit the possibilities of any onward services from Belfast without variable gauge units, which then means dedicated stock. If this had/is going ahead (and I think it would be a total waste of money) then wouldnt the sensible approach be to run the freight/car shuttle from the M74 at the Scotland end, which would solve the road problem. 90mph/100mph similar to Eurotunnel for the car/HGV shuttle, line from WCML across SW Scotland would be 125mph passenger, so there should be enough paths. Existing line towards Glasgow would need upgrading.

Seeing as we in 'speculative' mode, reopen/new build rest of Waverly route to the WCML junction with the new NI line and shuttle terminal which would probably be around Gretna to give direct access to Edinburgh.

Regauging the entire NI network would be a pretty small fraction of the cost of any tunnel. Not that it makes it any more likely

 

[XAM2175]

Wasn’t the channel tunnel single figure billions in early 1990s for all 23 miles?

£4.6 billion in 1985 pounds after an 80% over-run, which inflates to just shy of £15 billion today. That, however, ignores all the other inflationary factors that especially affect infrastructure projects - just in the last year or two construction material costs have risen by circa 25% and structural steel in particular went up by nearly 75% from 2020 to 2021. Higher energy costs are going to keep the pressure on for the near future as well, and it's a fair guess that skilled labour isn't going to be any cheaper either.

Regauging the entire NI network would be a pretty small fraction of the cost of any tunnel. Not that it makes it any more likely

I suspect it would also be politically challenging unless you did the rest of the Irish network as well.