# Eurostar



## Andrew (Dec 26, 2015)

Are the new E320 train-sets an expansion of the Eurostar fleet or replacement of the old fleet that was put in service in the 1990's?

What is the height of the catenary wire above the tracks?

What about double decker trains on the Eurostar line?


----------



## PerRock (Dec 26, 2015)

Google would probably know these answers better...

It's a bit of both. I think in time it'll be a replacement.

It varies.

Tunnel size

peter


----------



## jis (Dec 26, 2015)

The Siemens sets are additions. The entire original fleet is being refurbished. In addition apparently DB intends to use modified ICE sets to make them compatible with the Eurotunnel emergency protocols, for service between Frankfurt and London within the next several years using the EU free access rules.

The biggest issue in Eurotunnel service is the ability to evacuate a train within the time parameters set, which is almost as tight as the ones required on commercial aircraft. Given the positioning and size of the escape doors from the main tube to the escape tube it restricts the total number of passengers that can occupy a given length of the train. So double decker or not they cannot carry more passengers per unit length than the limit set by the evacuation rules. Consequently, even though a TGV Duplex would easily fit physically, it would probably not be allowed because all those people cannot be evacuated fast enough.

The size, specifically height of trains passing through the tunnel are essentially unlimited when compared to the loading gauge outside the tunnel that the trains must meet in both UK and Europe, which is basic UIC loading gauge on the HSR line. The size of the tunnel is much large than the standard UIC loading gauge to allow the use of it by the motor vehicle carriers which are much taller than anything that would fit in standard UIC gauge.

If you have not traveled through the Eurotunnel, it is highly recommended that you do so at least once. If you know what to look for even in the darkness, it is a very unique experience, nothing like traveling through any other tunnel that I traveled through. It is just absolutely enormous! Specially those crossover chambers under the sea. And if you are on the correct side of the train (usually right side) you will see those welcome green lights flash by at regular intervals indicating the location of the escape doors from the running tube to the service tube.


----------



## Devil's Advocate (Dec 26, 2015)

Surprisingly enough the Eurotunnel's conventional freight services have thus far represented the primary threat to life and limb for Eurostar passengers. The passenger trains themselves are modern, fast, safe, and reliable. Unfortunately the freight services have been far less so. Personally I would prefer that the tunnel regulators focus on _preventing_ unnecessary disasters by clamping down on sloppy shippers and lazy lorry operators/maintainers rather than focusing on restricting passenger rail operations in an effort to _survive_ avoidable disasters.


----------



## MattW (Dec 26, 2015)

So it sounds like the Channel Tunnel is a bit constrained by its mixing of traffic on only two tracks. Has there ever been talk of either two more bores (four tracks total) or an additional two-track tunnel? Glancing at Wiki, I don't see anything myself.


----------



## Andrew (Dec 26, 2015)

Why not build a new high speed line between greater London and the Channel Tunnel? It appears that this line is quite busy--perhaps causing the Eurostar to get congested at times.

So it sounds as if multiple working Duplex Trains will never operate on the Eurostar?

This is a cool Eurostar cab ride video! https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=HHBTdZ6WMk4


----------



## jis (Dec 27, 2015)

HSR-1 from London to Dollands Moor has plenty of additional capacity yet to be used. Most of the traffic in the channel tunnel is road traffic ferries. At present there is at most 4tph each way of Eurostar traffic through the tunnel. It is nowhere near a congestion point so there is no need to worry about spending another 40 billion or so Euros.


----------



## Andrew (Dec 27, 2015)

Thanks.

And I think that a High Speed bypass is planned in Northwest France to avoid Lille in the future.


----------



## MattW (Dec 27, 2015)

Ah, ok. 4tph of Eurostar isn't too bad. Plenty of space for that much shuttle and general freight traffic I think.


----------



## Andrew (Dec 29, 2015)

So it sounds as if there are not any plans to raise signal towers and overpasses to permit double decker trains to operate on the English section of the Eurostar line.

Why did Eurostar order Velaro's from Siemens instead of the AGV from Alstom?


----------



## jis (Dec 29, 2015)

The English section of the Eurostar route has UIC loading gauge. So whatever can run in France can run on the English Eurostar route.


----------



## PerRock (Dec 30, 2015)

Andrew said:


> Why did Eurostar order Velaro's from Siemens instead of the AGV from Alstom?


Cost, Siemens offered them a better deal.

Additionally Alstom wasn't & couldn't offer the AVG to Eurostar, it didn't meet the specs. Whatever Alstom would have provided would be a new build (using existing technology pretty much the same thing they are planning on doing for the Acela 2 (if they get the bid.) Alstom did sue multiple times to get the bid from Siemens, but eventually lost all their lawsuits, and decided to end litigation.

Trains traversing the Chunnel have/had* very strict rules one construction, flammability, rescue capabilities, etc. Which means you can't just take an existing train, repaint it and run it thru the tunnel. The new Class 374/e320 is a fairly heavily modified Velaro to fit these new specs.

*Some of these rules have been lessened, but I don't recall what exactly; Google will know if you're really that interested.

This all being said, I don't really understand where you are going with this line of thought with the double-deckers. High Speed 1 (the British line) isn't near capacity, they can still fit more trains on the tracks. So inventing new double-decker high speed trains to run on HS1 isn't really viable in any sense of the imagination.

Why are we trying to fix something that isn't broken?

peter


----------



## jis (Dec 30, 2015)

He is just carrying with one of the hoary traditions of AU - find solutions looking for a problem


----------



## slasher-fun (Jan 17, 2016)

Andrew said:


> What is the height of the catenary wire above the tracks?


Hi,

Exactly 5,08 m on all high speed lines, that's 16'4".


----------



## slasher-fun (Jan 17, 2016)

PerRock said:


> This all being said, I don't really understand where you are going with this line of thought with the double-deckers. High Speed 1 (the British line) isn't near capacity, they can still fit more trains on the tracks. So inventing new double-decker high speed trains to run on HS1 isn't really viable in any sense of the imagination.


Train companies pay a toll fee for each train running on tracks. It will cost less to transport the same number of passengers with less train services. That's also why Eurostar trainsets are 18 cars long (16 for e320), not the usual 8-10 figure.


----------



## Andrew (Jan 18, 2016)

slasher-fun said:


> Andrew said:
> 
> 
> > What is the height of the catenary wire above the tracks?
> ...


That's good to know. If that is the case, then why aren't Duplex train-sets taller than the current 14'2''?


----------



## CCC1007 (Jan 18, 2016)

Weight on each axel?


----------



## PerRock (Jan 18, 2016)

slasher-fun said:


> Andrew said:
> 
> 
> > What is the height of the catenary wire above the tracks?
> ...


Actually, 5.08m is the lowest. According the Network Rail Registry of Infrastructure for HS1, the Catenary height can range from 5.08m to 5.1m (16' 8"-9") and has a 200-400mm (7.8" to 15.7") allowable uplift.

Why no taller? because the railroad (in the 14'2" case, SNCF) deemed it not necessary. The TGV Duplexes occasionally run on non-LGV lines and in foreign countries so there may be height restrictions there. But adding height isn't going to add much (if anything) in the way of additional capacity. What it will do is add weight, making more difficult to reach the higher speeds.

peter


----------



## Fan Railer (Jan 21, 2016)

CCC1007 said:


> Weight on each axel?


http://www.mobility.siemens.com/mobility/global/sitecollectiondocuments/en/rail-solutions/high-speed-and-intercity-trains/velaro/velaro-e320-en.pdf


----------



## Andrew (Feb 6, 2016)

I am trying to find information, but I have not been able to locate it:

Does anyone know how many trains per hour the busy LGV Nord section sees, and why the Eurostar shares these tracks, rather than have it's own alignment that runs parallel to the LGV Nord in France?


----------



## jis (Feb 6, 2016)

Eurostar offers a typical load of 2tph (occasionally upto 4tph) in each direction between Cocquelle (French end of the tunnel) and Fretin Triangle (where the Brussels service goes north and the Paris service goes south).DB might add another tph in each direction to the mix. From thence the load offered by Eurostar on the LGV Nord Line is typically 1tph in each direction with very occasional 2tph. DB might add one more tph to the north from Fretin Triangle when its Frankfurt service materializes. We are a long long way from needing another pair of tracks. LGVs can typically handle 12 to 15tph in each direction. The French have also become considerably more stingy with funding new LGV since the more recent additions are not even recovering their operating cost fully, let alone pay down their capital. But in any case, it is not Eurostar traffic that will cause the Lille to Paris direct link to be built, but it will be growth of Thalys traffic and traffic to Lille and other destinations in northern France. Eurostar load is noise in the mix.


----------



## PerRock (Feb 6, 2016)

Andrew said:


> I am trying to find information, but I have not been able to locate it:
> 
> Does anyone know how many trains per hour the busy LGV Nord section sees, and why the Eurostar shares these tracks, rather than have it's own alignment that runs parallel to the LGV Nord in France?


I don't have numbers to back this up but...

I do not think the LGV Nord is as busy as you think it is.

For a couple reasons:

1) While yes SNCF has TGV trains, they are the more expensive rail-travel option. The vast majority of travelers along the LGV Nord route are going to be taking the regular Regional and EuroCity trains, not the TGVs.

2) The LGVs are already a dedicated ROW from the standard-rail line. The only trains that travel on the LGVs are TGVs & Eurostars (I'm not even certain if the ICE trains get to travel on them) All the slower regional, EuroCity, RER, etc trains run on separate lines. It's not like the NEC where everything is bunched together on 4 tracks.

So if you really wanted to know how many trains traveled on the LGV Nord line, pick a station on the line and count the number of TGVs passing thru it; add the Eurostars and you have a good approximation.

peter


----------



## Jean (Feb 8, 2016)

Just to depart from the technical, we (my husband and I) hope to travel on Eurostar from London to Avignon, then return from Paris to London several weeks later. This would probably be in May. Is it worth paying for business class? Any tips in general? This will probably be our one and only trip on it.

Thanks,

Jean


----------



## Devil's Advocate (Feb 8, 2016)

Jean said:


> Just to depart from the technical, we (my husband and I) hope to travel on Eurostar from London to Avignon, then return from Paris to London several weeks later. This would probably be in May. Is it worth paying for business class?


That's an ambiguous question. Is _what_ worth paying for business class?


----------



## cirdan (Feb 8, 2016)

MattW said:


> So it sounds like the Channel Tunnel is a bit constrained by its mixing of traffic on only two tracks. Has there ever been talk of either two more bores (four tracks total) or an additional two-track tunnel? Glancing at Wiki, I don't see anything myself.


Yes, there has.

The original Channel Tunnel concession gave Eurotunnel (as inEurotunnel plc, the publically traded company) the right (that is, the monopoly) to build a channel tunnel. The condition was that by a certain date, they must either present a proposal for a second tunnel, and if they fail to do that, anybody else can present said project, and hence that monopoly ends.

That date expired some years back. I think Eurotunnel did hand in a pro-forma proposal for an additiona bore to protect its monopoly but the governemnts of France and the UK declined to reply to it, knowing full well it was a pro forma piece of paperwork not intended to be acted on. It is unlikely to be acted on as the present Eurotunbnel company is pretty much lumbered with debt and couldn't possibly raise the capital for a second tunnel, and there isn't really the traffic to justify it. Fortunately for them, much the same reason is preventing anybody else from building one so they're safe for now.


----------



## cirdan (Feb 8, 2016)

jis said:


> The Siemens sets are additions. The entire original fleet is being refurbished. In addition apparently DB intends to use modified ICE sets to make them compatible with the Eurotunnel emergency protocols, for service between Frankfurt and London within the next several years using the EU free access rules.


From waht I've heard, not the entire original fleet is being refurbished, but only those presently in traffic. Several surplus sets are leased to SNCF and it would appear SNCF doesn't want to keep them long term and Eurotunnel doesn't want them back so they are likely to be disposed of within the next 5 year horizon. SNCF is also disposing of its Réseau sets, with the first two sets already being out of traffic, but none scrapped so far. The Eurostar sets are more less the same technology.


----------



## cirdan (Feb 8, 2016)

jis said:


> HSR-1 from London to Dollands Moor has plenty of additional capacity yet to be used. Most of the traffic in the channel tunnel is road traffic ferries. At present there is at most 4tph each way of Eurostar traffic through the tunnel. It is nowhere near a congestion point so there is no need to worry about spending another 40 billion or so Euros.


There is still plenty of spare capacity on HS1 but not everything that goes down HS1 also goes into the tunnel. There are the javelin suburban services for example.

In the past freight didn't run on HS1 but used the legacy network, for which the dual mode class 92 locomotives were required. This was not a good idea as those lines are already pretty congested with suburban trains and furthermore getting trains from the South of London to the North of London required some pretty convoluted routing. Increasingly these freights are using HS1.


----------



## cirdan (Feb 8, 2016)

Devil's Advocate said:


> Surprisingly enough the Eurotunnel's conventional freight services have thus far represented the primary threat to life and limb for Eurostar passengers. The passenger trains themselves are modern, fast, safe, and reliable. Unfortunately the freight services have been far less so. Personally I would prefer that the tunnel regulators focus on _preventing_ unnecessary disasters by clamping down on sloppy shippers and lazy lorry operators/maintainers rather than focusing on restricting passenger rail operations in an effort to _survive_ avoidable disasters.


I disagree.

The truck carrying trains have been the cause of most incidents. I'm not aware of a conventional freight causing any serious trouble.


----------



## Devil's Advocate (Feb 8, 2016)

cirdan said:


> Devil's Advocate said:
> 
> 
> > Surprisingly enough the Eurotunnel's conventional freight services have thus far represented the primary threat to life and limb for Eurostar passengers. The passenger trains themselves are modern, fast, safe, and reliable. Unfortunately the freight services have been far less so. Personally I would prefer that the tunnel regulators focus on _preventing_ unnecessary disasters by clamping down on sloppy shippers and lazy lorry operators/maintainers rather than focusing on restricting passenger rail operations in an effort to _survive_ avoidable disasters.
> ...


I don't think we disagree so much as I simply consider conventional tractor trailers on conventional freight trains to be "conventional freight." Also, in the future please consider using the [MultiQuote] button rather than quadruple-posting a series of discrete replies.


----------



## jis (Feb 8, 2016)

cirdan said:


> Several surplus sets are leased to SNCF and it would appear SNCF doesn't want to keep them long term and *Eurotunnel *doesn't want them back so they are likely to be disposed of within the next 5 year horizon.


Eurotunnel? Did you mean the outfit that runs Eurostars, which I understand is quite distinct from Eurotunnel, specially after the British government divested itself of the ownership? Why would Eurotunnel want to acquire a bunch of passenger equipment?


----------



## cirdan (Feb 8, 2016)

jis said:


> cirdan said:
> 
> 
> > Several surplus sets are leased to SNCF and it would appear SNCF doesn't want to keep them long term and *Eurotunnel *doesn't want them back so they are likely to be disposed of within the next 5 year horizon.
> ...


Yes, that's what I meant. Sorry abut the typo


----------



## Andrew (Feb 26, 2016)

It would be cool if the LGV Picardie gets built.


----------



## ScouseAndy (Apr 2, 2016)

PerRock said:


> 1) While yes SNCF has TGV trains, they are the more expensive rail-travel option. The vast majority of travelers along the LGV Nord route are going to be taking the regular Regional and EuroCity trains, not the TGVs.


TGV is not always the more expensive. If booked in advance and travel off peak TGV can be cheaper than traditional trains. This is because in France intercitie trains have fixed pricing but TGV have dynamic pricing.


----------

