Eurostar

[jabird]

Yes, I know they are a train company but users on another thread have suggested we have a Eurostar discussion somewhere else.

Why is Eurostar relevant as an 'airline'?

* Operates in direct competition with airlines
* Unlike other rail services, has security & border checks like an airport
* All stations are part of the IATA coding systems
* Operates at speeds which are actually competitive to air travel
* Future developments will affect route to destinations like AMS, RTM, ANR & CGN
* As 'alternative' London airports open up, their development can be compared to existing Eurostar services (see SEN thread where request is made to move ES chat to new thread).
* This would be a better place to discuss any 'plane v train' type debate, rather than having it come up on each individual thread.
* Eurostar operates through numerous booking systems.
* Other European train services operate in code-share with airlines.

If mods say the thread belongs in a rail forum, then fair enough, but I think E* is a special case. If our German cousins can see a plane as just a train with wings, then I am sure we can see Eurostar as a plane without them!

[AirResearcher]

Good suggestion.
Heres'a few things to consider.

• Eurostar claims it is carbon neutral - has anyone investigated how that is possible just taking into account the airconditioning system?
• Safety- These trains travel almost as fast as a small commuter turboprop.Not a seatbelt to be seen never mind anything else, and I would hazard a guess that an on track collision is statistally more likely than in the air?
• Bottlenecks - what happens when the maximum capacity of the tunnel is reached... does anyone have the exact figures to hand? It certainly cant cope with replacing all short haul EU air traffic
• What happens if the French end of Eurostar decide to go on strike during the 2012 Olympics? Is there a contingency plan for all the other transport links that would be needed?

[jabird]

AR,

Eurostar claims it is carbon neutral - has anyone investigated how that is possible just taking into account the airconditioning system?

The term is carbon neutral. The whole offset industry depends on the fact that most people don't consider the other gasses which make up 50% of the problem.

But aircon will be calculated as part of the overall footprint. In a car, afaik, we're talking about 3% of fuel costs? The nasty bits should get taken out on recycling.

Safety- These trains travel almost as fast as a small commuter turboprop.Not a seatbelt to be seen never mind anything else, and I would hazard a guess that an on track collision is statistally more likely than in the air?

The High Speed Rail industry has an excellent safety record - TGV in France never had a single accident fatality during high speed ops. German ICE had the Eschede incident in 98 - 101 fatalities.

As a whole, safety of air v rail is very comparable, depending on equipment used and whether you measure per mile (favours air) or per journey (favours rail).

Bottlenecks - what happens when the maximum capacity of the tunnel is reached... does anyone have the exact figures to hand? It certainly cant cope with replacing all short haul EU air traffic

Who is suggesting it should replace all short haul air, apart from the odd lunatic fringe enviro group?

What we're looking at is a slow expansion of the envelope in which people prefer to switch to rail over air. This is a really key debate for both industries, so if this isn't the place to discuss it, hope mods can suggest whereabouts in pprune it is!

What happens if the French end of Eurostar decide to go on strike during the 2012 Olympics? Is there a contingency plan for all the other transport links that would be needed?

Strikes can affect both industries, except where the relevant national government has implemented a no-strike law - and I don't think that could apply within the EU.

[xtypeman]

However if we had joined up thinking..... Major transport interchange based around an airport then Eurostar could become part of our discussions. Just think Virgin West coast replacing LHR-MAN-GLA-EDI via HS2. Bmid operating to BRU vis HS1 and Channel Tunnel etc etc......

Taking off the anorak and boble hat.......

[AirResearcher]

Thanks jabird...all good points, I'm actually very pro high speed rail...as a well integrated inter-modal transport system, which the UK is lagging well behind on.. Ive been trying for over a year to put some ideas forward, but it seems the decision makers (including Transport for London) cant' get their heads around the benefits.

Ref the safety aspect, I was highlighing the fact that safety procedures and legislation for aviation are much higher and stricter than for high-speed rail, and therefore this creates a cost disadvantage for airlines. The two cant be compared in every aspect but something as basic as a seat belt wouldnt be a bad idea! And what about luggage stowage? a piece of luggage travelling at 150 mph is going to do the same amount of damage as it would on an aeroplane if it comes to an abrupt halt

Ive asked Eurotunnel several times for figs on the Co2 emissions of the chunnel cooling sytem, they havent replied yet. I suspect its much higher than we are led to believe.

[firstchoice7e7]

Eurostar no longer claiming that they are carbon neutral.

''For these reasons, Eurostar has decided to evolve its tread lightly programme to ensure it remains relevant and compelling to as many people as possible. From today, Eurostar will cease carbon offsetting and will no longer offer carbon neutral journeys. However, the operator has made sure that the journeys of anyone already booked to travel, will be offset and will still be carbon neutral.''

Source :
Eurostar raises the bar on environmental commitments

[jabird]

AR,

Ive been trying for over a year to put some ideas forward, but it seems the decision makers (including Transport for London) cant' get their heads around the benefits.

There is a clear political will, backed by the 3 major parties for HS2. Personally, air v rail rather than rail v road has always been my interest, so a watered down (as it will be) HS2 which only links B-International to Acton will be as good as useless. Won't replace a single air journey. Rail already winning the battle on LON-MAN and it didn't take HS2 to extinguish LCY-LPL & LHR-LBA.

Ref the safety aspect, I was highlighing the fact that safety procedures and legislation for aviation are much higher and stricter than for high-speed rail, and therefore this creates a cost disadvantage for airlines.

That is a fair point - but then again, I felt for a long time that lifejackets were there to make people feel safer, rather than to be used in an actual emergency.

Then we had the Hudson landing, but even that showed little lifejacket usage.

Airlines will always claim a cost disadvantage - but air travel has traditionally been less resource intensive, as both industries share the need for a terminal, but aircraft use up no ground infrastructure once in flight.

The tables have now turned, as airlines have to spend so much of their turnover on fuel.

Ive asked Eurotunnel several times for figs on the Co2 emissions of the chunnel cooling sytem, they havent replied yet. I suspect its much higher than we are led to believe.

Do you mean air conditioning onboard the train (up to Eurostar as train operator) - or a system to keep the tunnels themselves cool?

I can't see why they would use that. Many older rail tunnels have ventilation shafts going back to the coal days, but nothing mechanical in those. Road tunnels use ventilation to clear fumes but no diesel trains would be allowed in the tunnel.

[AirResearcher]

Thanks firstchoice7e7 ... I think in time they will improve the carbon emissions, but as with all modes of transport, carbon offsetting is a concept that I would like to believe works. But I fear its only a matter of time before there is a documentary on tv showing that money destined for planting trees etc for carbon offsetting, has not been used for that purpose.

I raise this emissions issue because of link to the bizarre EU ETS situation - which I am also convinced is a flawed concept, as do the Chinese Govt who are blocking the purchase of 10 A380s by Hong Kong Airlines in protestat having to pay EU ETS.

[Capetonian]

The High Speed Rail industry has an excellent safety record - TGV in France never had a single accident fatality during high speed ops. German ICE had the Eschede incident in 98 - 101 fatalities.

Not only this, but the Japanese have been doing it longer, faster, and with more frequency than the French and also without any accidents.

[AirResearcher]

Thanks again jabird,

Agreed ref HS2 Govt support in priciple, but they have made a poor choice of Acton. Tere's a much better solution which, I have put a lot of work into and it would not only solve the problem of a good link up to LHR and Central London, it could also solve the 3rd runway issue, and reduce stacking (and associated delays/congestion and pollution). TfL werent remotely interested -they are convinced, arrogantly so, that Boris Island is the only solution. There are several other benefits too which would be politically beneficial and would probably balance against the fairly minor negatives. So I have to question TfLs agenda as the costs of building the infrastructure in the Thames Estuary, plus the environmental impact, timescales, and the ATC issues etc etc make it very unwise at the least

Yes I meant the cooling sustem for the tunnel, though the onboard a/c obviously plays a part too.

[jabird]

In 2006, research showed that a Eurostar journey produces around a tenth of the CO2 of an equivalent flight between London, Paris and Brussels.

Not only this, but the Japanese have been doing it longer, faster, and with more frequency than the French and also without any accidents.

Well, to go back to the power source argument, this '10x' argument was produced in one report and then accepted as gospel and recycled for every single rail route the world over. Never mind occupancy, never mind if it is actually a diesel train!

Theoretically, 10x can be 100x or 1000x if we're just comparing windmills to kerosene. But there's so much more energy than that going into the whole process - concrete, tracks, trains etc.

So use the Eurostar argument for a high speed domestic line which will compete against a recently upgraded service which already operates at very good frequency and it becomes very misleading indeed.

[AirResearcher]

There have been other HS rail incidents, thankfully not many, the ICE one in 2008 resulted in several injuries when it hit a flock of sheep at 120 mph in a tunnel on the way from Hamburg to Munich.

The issue here is that airlines have to spend far more on safety procedures and equipment than HS rail, and maybe its time to look at HS rail to bring it more in line - especially with the advent of the new Chinese Maglev trains. Free and fair competition also requires balanced safety legislation.

[racedo]

HS2 is a crock that will suck £60 billion in to build it to save little time and won't be ready for 20 years. Its a spending program that needs to be strangled at birth.

It will never pay for itself when taking into consideration that it will need to destroy the existing rail services to even get the passengers on board.

London - Manchester air services carry just over a Million people a year and that is declining.

[Hipennine]

A few points:

1/ I can't remember where I read it, but there was a detailed study of the net emmisions generated by a full virgin pendolino from London to Glasgow, compared to a fully loaded A320, but also compared to a good old loco hauled train with BR Mark 3 carriages. The carbon footprint of the old fashioned 100mph train was about one tenth of the pendolino, and the pendolino slightly exceeded the Airbus. Given that the Eurostar trains are of similar specs to the pendolino, it won't be too different. Modern trains have so much more onboard equipment that draws power, and weigh more per pax seat, which in turn requires more energy to drag it along. New transmission capacity was one of the big hidden costs of the West coast modernisation to get it up to pendolino requirements.

2/ Can't buy the relative safety arguments re seat belts. The main reason for the airline lap belt and luggage securing etc, is to overcome the acceleration movements in every dimension associated with most take-offs and landing, as well as incidents in cruise. If a train experienced anything like that, it would de-rail. If a train experienced that frequency of turbulence, the entire european network would be blocked with derailments within hours.

3/ Eurotunnel, along with the other new long length alpine rail tunnels, has a requirement for a very sophisticated ventilation system. Not only is heat build up a problem because there are no natural vents under the sea or high mountains, but also the control of air movement is a key part of the fire control systems in these tunnels.

4/ It grieves me to see talk of HS2. If anybody wants to see what proper reasoned investment in public transport can achieve in optimising total journey time and convenience look to Switzerland - no very high speed lines there, although plenty of miles of new track. Outwith TGV, the state of SNCF is chronically bad. In Japan, the Shin Kansen may be impressive, but convenient interchange with other rail lines, etc is poor, and timetables generally are designed around point to point journeys, not end to end convenience.

[AirResearcher]

Thanks Hipennine

ref:
1/ thats really useful info, I hadnt come across that yet..thanks!

2/The seatbelts, as well as movements in other planes (pardon the pun) are required to withstand 9g forward movement, which is 'abrupt stop ' territory - so that aspect is as relevant to HS trains as aircraft. I guess the chances of a derail/collision at that speed would involve other unplanned directions of travel for seat occupants who, if unrestrained could hurtle at 150+ mph causing damage to themselves and others. ( an unrestrained 70kg man effectively weighing over half a tonne flying down a railway carriage isnt easy to stop if you are in the way) :-)


3/ Agree again... and of course the ambient temperature underground is a major factor too in heat build up too.

4/ Agree ref Switzerland, its the most smoothly co-ordinated stress free travel system I have ever used. And agree again about the Japanese Shankansens...the links are very tricky to negotiate (for foreigners especially), and they are also incredibly expensive to use, even at preferential tourist rates. The booking offices, even at Narita are like stepping back in time too, they still use huge printed books as reference for a lot of the services.

[Lokfuhrer]

My first 2 cents worth (lets see if i'm credit worthy)

Hello all,

Having mooched these forums for a few months now, i've finally registered now there's something i can discuss professionally rather than as just an intrested passenger/enthusiast.

One reason for the lack of seatbelts on trains is that to fit a seatbelt on a train is to then suggest it is safer for everyone to have a seat. And if everyone then needs a seat (and associated advance reservation), passengers then lose the turn up and go/squeeze onto your prefered train that a standard ticket provides. Trains being the most efficient mass people movers out of city centres also mean they will continue to have a peak demand way above the seating capacity for the main rush hours at least.

With regard to Accidents on high speed trains. you'll find that most of them (ie Enschede) have happened on conventional lines and at speeds below 125mph. There has not yet been a fatal accident on a train on a high speeed line.

As for HS2, its time saving headline is nothing when you consider the capacity it will free up on the conventional lines. Birmingham and Manchester to London have a 20 minute frequency. There are very few (if any) european cities that are more frequent than every 30 mins. To accommodate this frequency compromises local travel. And the people who commute over shorter distances along the intercity routes will find they have more chance of a seat and a comfortable journey if the longer distance travellers given the new high speed route. It is will also be possible to schedule more freight services into the timetable, which can only be a good thing. It would be interesting to see what the opposition were saying against building some of the routes in the victorian era that we now take for granted, and what the next generation of citizens will think of us if we don't get it started now. The alterative would be to rebuild our whole railway infrastructure to accomodate double deck trains and provide comfort rather than speed but that's another debate.

Having just come back from a(nother) weekend in Switzerland i can assure you that it doesn't have the topography to accommodate high speed lines very easily or the size to benefit. And its beauty should be admired at a slower pace.... It is not immune from delay/disruption and carrying a heavy suitcase up 3 steps from platform to train is something UK travellers would never accept from a british railway operator.

I flew back with Skywork from Bern Belp to London City. My first flight in a Dornier. I was very impressed with the service and friendly crew. It was just a shame that the capital city of Switzerland doesn't have a rail link to its (admittedly small) airport!

As for Eurostar being considered like an airline because of similar operational procedures check in, security ect, that is because the UK is not in Schengen. I believe High speed rail fits into a category of its own between conventional railways and airlines. The only thing stopping British Airways entering the high speed train market is that it doesn't have the (expensive) trains, staff or 'slots' through the channel tunnel, likewise all crosscountry trains need is a few (expensive) aircraft, staff and airport slots and away they go. My point is that both forms of transport are a prohibitively expensive business to commence unless you have an experienced partner or a subsidising government. They could be considered as passenger benefiting co ops should the overseeing governing authorities integrate the infrastructure in the UK as has been done at Frankfurt, Schiphol and CDG. Followed by through ticketing alliances. From a technicial perspective i don't see much similarity. If a train loses power from both engines, the passengers moan about the delay. If it happens during a flight, it's a sick person complains about the inconvenience if they can walk away from such a scenario. Should Eurostar be accepted as an 'airline' it should be alongside the TGV and ICE too, then it becomes a huge subject with huge possibility.

[Hipennine]

Lokfuhrer

Welcome to Pprune !

Starting to go way off topic here, but your Swiss experience sounds like mountain tourist area trains. A more direct comparison with Eurostar/HS2 etc would be the main east-west routes through the "lowlands" ie Geneva to St Gallen, with a current 4 hour journey or the new deep alpine tunnels. There have been proposals for High speed routes, but the policy has been convenience in end to end journeys - even the new NBS between Bern and Olten is only a 125mph railway, but gave a masive capacity boost. Investment in modern main-line and suburban trains with raised station platforms, has eliminated a lot of that 3 steps up into trains - with last years order for new rolling stock will virtually eliminate it. Bringing this back to Airlines, Airports etc., all this convenience is available direct from Zurich Airport.

[paully]

AVE

In Spain, their high speed train is called AVE and first went head to head with the airlines on the lucrative Madrid Barcelona shuttle, as a result they beat the airlines hands down resulting in the airlines leaving, what was their most profitable route. Now there are very few flights between these two points and AVE is expanding rapidly. Only recently this system has been bought by the USA..

High speed trains are here to stay and without doubt they will turn out to be the main competition to airlines.....well not in the UK obviously as we cant afford them but will be interesting on mainland Europe in time to come.

[TartinTon]

As with all these things it depends when you buy your ticket. If I'm buying for tomorrow I'll get stung whether I'm travelling with Eurostar or domestically. If I can plan ahead then I can get tickets for £47 (with one change on the return) or £66 with no changes for a LON-GLA train ticket. That, to me, seems like a decent fare.

[jabird]

The issue here is that airlines have to spend far more on safety procedures and equipment than HS rail, and maybe its time to look at HS rail to bring it more in line - especially with the advent of the new Chinese Maglev trains. Free and fair competition also requires balanced safety legislation.

AR, are you essentially saying that rail operators should be forced to install safety belts just so they can be on a level playing field with airlines?

By the same logic, we should slow all cars down to about 3mph, give cyclists a sponge suit to wear and probably just ban motorcyclists outright (yipee, Guangzhou here we come!)

Re: TfL, their remit is to serve air transit and long distance rail, not to propose new airports.

I can't remember where I read it, but there was a detailed study of the net emmisions generated by a full virgin pendolino from London to Glasgow, compared to a fully loaded A320, but also compared to a good old loco hauled train with BR Mark 3 carriages. The carbon footprint of the old fashioned 100mph train was about one tenth of the pendolino

I'd like to see the study - was it peer reviewed / debated?

I doubt the pendolini are anything like 10x more fuel hungy - but there is an inherent problem that the longer the distance the journey the train is competing on, the faster it has to go, therefore the more energy it uses, therefore it becomes less competitive with air on environmental terms.

Afaik, the Swiss & Norwegian power systems are 'carbon free' - Swiss 60:40 hyro-nuclear, Norwegian all hydro.

Afaik Eurostar bought their energy from a renewable provider - but people probably look at the figure and think - 10x is that true?

Well if you just do a simple CO2 released per journey then it could be well more than 10x. Factor in the embodied energy building the track & trains, not to mention the windmills, dams and nuclear plants and the 10x starts to get reduced heavily.

4/ It grieves me to see talk of HS2. If anybody wants to see what proper reasoned investment in public transport can achieve in optimising total journey time and convenience look to Switzerland - no very high speed lines there, although plenty of miles of new track.

Yes and very reliable connections too. But also, as in the UK, fares are a closer refelction of the actual cost of operating the service, perhaps except for the mountain lines which charge extortionate fares - presumably because they can!

I flew back with Skywork from Bern Belp to London City. My first flight in a Dornier. I was very impressed with the service and friendly crew. It was just a shame that the capital city of Switzerland doesn't have a rail link to its (admittedly small) airport!

Not really realistic as I'm sure you know, even if it is also gatway to Interlaken - but BSL also no rail link. Can't fault GVA & ZRH for rail access.