Eurostar seeking financial aid

[caradoc]

14 hours ago, phil-b259 said:

Had those trains [Edinburgh/Waterloo Eurostar connection] been open to domestic travellers then I bet they would have had reasonable-ish loadings with folk using them as a cross country service within the UK.

 

Not sure I would agree with that phil-b259; Between Edinburgh and Peterborough the train simply duplicated the existing ECML Edinburgh/Kings X service, which ran hourly, if not half-hourly, throughout the day. Also, I never used the train so cannot be sure, but would they not have been open to domestic passengers anyway ? Apart from anything else there would be no way to prevent anyone boarding the train ! 

 

[Mark Saunders]

17 minutes ago, caradoc said:

 

Not sure I would agree with that phil-b259; Between Edinburgh and Peterborough the train simply duplicated the existing ECML Edinburgh/Kings X service, which ran hourly, if not half-hourly, throughout the day. Also, I never used the train so cannot be sure, but would they not have been open to domestic passengers anyway ? Apart from anything else there would be no way to prevent anyone boarding the train ! 

 

 

This was under BR and ticket restrictions were less restrictive and these services would jut have evened out the numbers travelling on each train.

 

They were not open to any passengers not holding tickets to the continent!

 

 

[woodenhead]

46 minutes ago, adb968008 said:

I think the only missed service today that might just have been a viable option was for a low budget long distance sleeper from London to Eastern Europe, splitting in Germany and running on the back of domestic services to Warsaw, Krakow and Budapest, given the huge numbers of travellers on this route who use road coaches to London today, though that window has passed in 2016.

 

Or China - with the intermodal services coming from there already, and the gauge changing trains that China is now producing will allow a very long distance service soon - a mixed sleeper/seated service all the way from Europe to China would benefit those who don't wish to fly.

[phil-b259]

4 hours ago, caradoc said:

 

... but would they not have been open to domestic passengers anyway ? Apart from anything else there would be no way to prevent anyone boarding the train ! 

 

 

No they were NOT!

 

While its true that as they departed from the same platforms as ordinary train services then there was nothing to stop domestic travellers boarding them - domestic tickets were not valid for travel on them so any domestic passengers would have been issued with a penalty fare and dumped off at the first stop as per all other situations where someone ios traveling without a valid ticket.

 

I believe the way they were advertised on departure boards / timetables was also deliberately done in such a way as  to make it clear that domestic passengers were not welcome.

 

Nobody quite explained why,  but I think its because the DfT & Home Office regarded them as running in the paths of Regional Eurostar services and they wished to avoid passenger confusion 'rules' once they became through services to Europe.

 

The other more cynical explanation is the Government knew there would never be enough demand to make them remotely viable so by restricting usage they would have some figures to back up the decision to axe regional services for good.

Edited May 7, 2021 by phil-b259

[phil-b259]

10 hours ago, adb968008 said:

I think your missing the commercial aspect of it...

 

what makes more revenue.. 500 * £200 passengers travelling London to Paris, or 500 * £30 passengers going from St Pancras to Ashford, followed by an near ECS to Calais with a few hardy's picking seats after Ashford, then a bunch of locals from Calais to Lille for £15 each ?

Filling Eurostar to standing with domestics, slows down the intercity service aspect, loses revenue.

 

All the major train companies do the same, separate Intercity from Suburban.. stopping an Azuma all Stations to Peterborough really doesnt help, neither would it help Eurostar.

There is a solution already in place... it's called South Eastern High Speed on this side of the channel and OuiGo TGV on the other.

 

Even if there was no baggage checks or immigration, Eurostars business model is built on point to point... not city to city, it's competition is air travel, not a class 375.

 

You also destroy yoiur own point of XC, by saying going indirect via London is faster.. XC is a Long Distance commuter, not an express service... 

 

I think the only missed service today that might just have been a viable option was for a low budget long distance sleeper from London to Eastern Europe, splitting in Germany and running on the back of domestic services to Warsaw, Krakow and Budapest, given the huge numbers of travellers on this route who use road coaches to London today, though that window has passed in 2016.

 

 

 

You still don't get the point - we are not talking about an all stations train from Edinburgh to France!

 

We are talking about a Manchester or Birmingham to London express service (with limited calls at places like Rugby or Stockport as per current practice) which is then extended to France!

 

In effect the Eurostar replaces one of the train paths used by LNER, Avanti to London. London passengers could simply alight at St Pancras or Stratford International and be replaced with international travellers from London the costs of running the train are therefore covered by those breaking the journey in London  - not just those few end to end travellers!

 

You are basically linking two express services together so people don't have to lug themselves and their luggage thorough UK border facilities in London making the whole experience of traveling to Europe virtually seamless.

 

Exact stopping patterns would needless to say be something of a trail and error situation and its quite possible that some would be taken away and others added based on ticket and ridership data - so any any examples I have given thus far are purely illustrative.

 

As for South Eastern or Oui Go already providing services - it has long been my belief (backed up by much real world analysis) that competition for rail passengers is with road and air transport. Very few routes are suitable for rail on rail competition (London to Birmingham being a notably exception where it works) and direct competition on the same corridors represents a wasteful squandering of railway capacity.

 

Thus if domestic passengers could use Eurostars as far as Ashford and change onto SE services there it would help the business case of stopping some more Eurostars there - which in turn means that Ashford becomes a much more attractive point for folk to catch Eurostar from and helps drive up the potential usage*.

 

* International rail services are not immune to the effects of frequent services - just as ridership on the north London line or the Turo branch line has increased massively as a result of a more frequent service, the same effect can also be seen on international trains within Europes Schengen zone

 

 

Edited May 7, 2021 by phil-b259

[phil-b259]

10 hours ago, adb968008 said:

 

 

Using immigration as a rant for why it cant be done doesnt hide the fact that it's pointless to do it anyway.

 

 

What is so hard to understand.

 

UK immigration policy PREVENTS Eurostar from even TRYING regional Eurostar services! Whether commercial demand (or its socially desirable to subsidise such services) makes the thing viable is rather irrelevant if the law prohibits it anyway!

 

Hence any discussion over Eurostar's potential cannot be carried out without referencing UK immigration policy.

 

Its a bit like someone discussing what car they want to buy when they are banned from holding a driving licence for medical reasons!

 

Its hardly going to be a revelation that I think current policy stinks and the little Englander mentality is ruining the country - but in a democracy everyone is of course entitled to their own view on the matter.

 

What I cannot stomach however is the pretence of some, both on here and elsewhere who seems to think that matters pertaining to Eurostar can be carried out without any reference to the massively restrictive border policy in place. 

 

It is accepted that Eurostar (before the Pandemic hit) was doing a good job of catering for Three Capitals' users within current border / immigration / free movement policies - and if you feel that the current border regime should stay in place then that is as much as can be hoped for from Eurostar in future.

Edited May 7, 2021 by phil-b259

[Allegheny1600]

8 hours ago, adb968008 said:

 

Europeans share land borders for centuries, family connections exist between political borders, so its very likely a family near Antwerp has family in Netherlands and France and travel between.

 

That connection doesn't exist to the same extent here, as we are an island, but obviously those connections do exist within the UK, thus making cross country viable.

 

I honestly cannot believe you wrote that!

The various countries that make up the UK (including the Republic of Ireland) have built up family connections across  all borders and so it goes between the rest of Europe and the UK. 
I could cite many examples of friends, colleagues and family who are so connected. 

Personally, I would love to take the train from Greece back to the UK but my wife prefers to get it over and done with in 3 or 4 hours, were we living in France or Germany, it would be a no brainer.

[caradoc]

I have to agree with adb968008: I live in Scotland but come from England, where many of my family live, so that is my cross border connection. Another family member has Californian connections through marriage (no, its not HRH him and her), but despite my surname being Germanic in origin I have no family connections with the Continent whatsoever. 

 

[jonhall]

 

Mixing the two types of traffic also makes the services complicated to operate, and has potential to import delays from one area to the other. I know one ex operator of trains south of the Thames found a sure-fire way of ruining both bits of their network was when a fault on the Kingston roundabout transferred a delay from the Windsor side to the mainline/suburban out of waterloo (or v.v.). I can imagine the derision on the platform at Birmingham when the announcer tells them the 15:22 at platform 2 is delayed by 300 minutes due to track problems in the Aachen area.

 

Another negative for mixing domestic and international is luggage - most travellers don't like having their luggage out of site, and the DB/Thalys services from Brussels Midi/Nord/Lille to Cologne had a very bad reputation for luggage thieves hopping on at Midi, then hopping off with your stuff at Nord.

 

Jon

[phil-b259]

1 hour ago, caradoc said:

I have to agree with adb968008: I live in Scotland but come from England, where many of my family live, so that is my cross border connection. Another family member has Californian connections through marriage (no, its not HRH him and her), but despite my surname being Germanic in origin I have no family connections with the Continent whatsoever. 

 

 

Geography (or more specifically the channel and North Sea) are a significant barrier to travel in the sense that out of necessity, the quantity of links are low compared to the hundreds of roads / rivers and tens of railways  which like France and Germany say.

 

Thus I do agree that the links between the UK and other countries is not as significant as is the case where places share a land border or where territory has been passed between countries during war.

 

And before anyone gives the example of Ireland it should be remembered that the English / British did indeed invade and occupy the country for many years (some would argue they still do with respect to NI) so it doesn't really count for the purposes of this discussion.

 

Had the UK experienced it the other way round and been conquered by others in the years after 1066 then I suspect British attitudes would be different.

 

So the question is more do you regard the relative lack of such links between the UK and our closest neighbours  as a disadvantage?

 

Some will say no and in a democracy one must respect their right to believe that

 

However others like myself say yes. The 'isolationist' tendency represented by an infamous newspaper headline of 'Fog in the Channel Europe cut off' does not bode well for social cohesion nor indeed for business (the more people travel the more economic activity they create) be it relating to links between villages, links between counties or links between nations.

 

The 'fear of outsiders' so successfully manipulated by various politicians and media organisations on the grounds that we will somehow lose our British identity / values / way of life taps into deep seated insecurities about who we are and what might be termed 'our place in the world'

 

If you are secure in your identity however then links with others can only be seen as positive  - something is being added rather than being taken away.

 

 

 

 

Edited May 7, 2021 by phil-b259

[phil-b259]

20 minutes ago, jonhall said:

 

Mixing the two types of traffic also makes the services complicated to operate, and has potential to import delays from one area to the other. I know one ex operator of trains south of the Thames found a sure-fire way of ruining both bits of their network was when a fault on the Kingston roundabout transferred a delay from the Windsor side to the mainline/suburban out of waterloo (or v.v.). I can imagine the derision on the platform at Birmingham when the announcer tells them the 15:22 at platform 2 is delayed by 300 minutes due to track problems in the Aachen area.

 

Another negative for mixing domestic and international is luggage - most travellers don't like having their luggage out of site, and the DB/Thalys services from Brussels Midi/Nord/Lille to Cologne had a very bad reputation for luggage thieves hopping on at Midi, then hopping off with your stuff at Nord.

 

Jon

 

These are indeed good operational points to consider - though not necessarily deal breakers! They certainly do not justify the current border rules relating to international travel!

 

On paper Thameslink has the potential to transfer delays from Brighton to Edinburgh yet that is perceived as a risk worth running because of the other benefits. (Note I am not trying to equate Thameslink to regional Eurostars when I say that). Similarly the Cross Country network has the ability to transport delays across the country yet it has enough value that splitting services at Birmingham New Street has been overwhelmingly rejected.

 

Theft of Luggage is not just a problem in Europe - it happens in the UK too! Thats why people like to keep luggage close and prefer under / between seat / overhead storage than vestibules and why trolley rather than making them walk to the buffet car are desired by passengers.

[adb968008]

3 hours ago, Allegheny1600 said:

I honestly cannot believe you wrote that!

The various countries that make up the UK (including the Republic of Ireland) have built up family connections across  all borders and so it goes between the rest of Europe and the UK. 
I could cite many examples of friends, colleagues and family who are so connected. 

Personally, I would love to take the train from Greece back to the UK but my wife prefers to get it over and done with in 3 or 4 hours, were we living in France or Germany, it would be a no brainer.

Well think about it...

 

Europe is connected, people know their neighbours...

 

No idea the statistic, but its clear millions of Europeans cross borders (mostly by car) every day (at least before Covid)... But most of those millions are probably only visiting the neighbouring country, not full pan european travel...they do that by air.

 

i’m sorry but comparatively to Europe, we do not integrate in the same way and never have .. Very few commute daily from Uk to France but Budapest to Bratislava, Bratislava to Vienna, Copenhagen to Malmo..

 

Helsinki to Tallin (ferry) even Basel to Mulhouse is a daily fact of life for thousands of people. Business between Geneva, Paris, Frankfurt, Brussels etc is a daily occurrence... even Jaroslaw (Poland) to Lviv (Ukraine) is a daily commute pattern... But Ashford to Lille ?, Calais to London..?

 

Any walk up, buy on the spot  Eurostar service from any point outside of London is going to be largely empty between Ashford and Calais, except Tourists &Holiday makers  who wouldn't care if they changed in London, Paris or Lille...

 

Ive travelled from London to Moscow, London to Rome and thousands of other routes around Europe, both personal and business, I remain unconvinced of the value of a Eurostar regional service beyond London... i’ll sign off with a thought...

 

if your so convinced of the lucrative nature of domestic UK to Europe through services.. why is it, when the UK has arguably the most liberal, open access rail network of the continent, that NS, SNCF, DB or anyone else considered taking it on.. especially when they already operate passenger franchises in the UK already ?.. none of them have even shown a remote sniff of interest.

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

Edited May 7, 2021 by adb968008

[Zomboid]

8 minutes ago, adb968008 said:

our so convinced of the lucrative nature of domestic UK to Europe through services.. why is it, when the UK has arguably the most liberal, open access rail network of the continent, that NS, SNCF, DB or anyone else considered taking it on.. especially when they already operate passenger franchises in the UK already ?.. none of them have even shown a remote sniff of interest

It wouldn't be realistic to just start running the trains because the infrastructure connectivity is a bit weak, and the border controls that were require would need a lot of investment to provide them. I imagine paths through the tunnel and on the high speed lines are expensive, and rolling stock requirements go beyond the norm for domestic operation, so starting small (like Hull Trains' 170s) wouldn't be viable.

 

Notwithstanding more recent changes, if we had chosen to join the Schengen zone then the border control requirements would have been negated, but that's not what the populous of the UK want, so it's all but impossible to provide such a service.

 

Even without that, getting access to the tunnel itself in an economically viable way would still be a major challenge - long trains at a high occupancy rate would probably be needed, and without HS2, it would probably be over 2 hours from Birmingham to the Folkestone portal, so journey times would be highly uncompetitive once you've got to an actual destination.

[Ron Ron Ron]

DB cited several reasons why they didn't go ahead with their proposed services to London.

Initially there were delays in the delivery of the 407's, making them years late.

Then they suffered technical problems that further delayed their entry into service.

They also had difficulty getting them approved for use on the Belgian and French lines.

 

However the main reasons for not going ahead were commercial.

Very high track access charges on the French LGV network.

The practicalities, difficulties and costs in trying to deal with the border issues.

Competition from low cost airlines.

The economic downturn.

The calculation that the service to Frankfurt, which was the main driver of the plan, would be unviable due to insufficient revenue generation from premium business travellers.

The plan depended on healthy loadings carrying business travellers between the 2 financial hubs, but their analysis showed that very few business passengers were interested in taking a 5.5 hr or longer train journey. It just wasn't marketable.

 

I can understand that, as I spent some time before I took early retirement, attending meetings in Brussels and Frankfurt.

Those who travelled to Frankfurt from Brussels and Paris, always flew. Never took the train.

(e.g. Brussels Airlines ran about 12 flights a day BRU-FRA M-F, at the time - about 10 years ago)

I asked one of my Belgian colleagues about taking the train, assuming there were high speed options and he almost laughed at me.

He said it took too long, was unreliable and a bit cr*p. It was far easier and quicker door to door, to fly.

Similarly the Germans flew to Brussels and Paris when we met there (although I didn't attend any of the Paris meetings myself).

If Frankfurt - Brussels or Paris by rail isn't attractive to business users, I can't imagine the idea of wasting almost a whole working day travelling one-way, to or from London is going to sell particularly well.

 

 

 

 

.

Edited May 7, 2021 by Ron Ron Ron

[roythebus1]

On 04/02/2021 at 18:00, hayfield said:

 

Again

 

Read my replies, The service is important, who runs it is irrelevant. You are the one showing a political bias, mine is based on finance and ownership. Why does the state need to own/run the franchise ? Its decided not to !!!

 

Eurostar as a company which we do not own, and have no responsibility for it. Like other TOC's when they go bust (like some have ) the government can take back temporary ownership to ensure the service until such time that other arrangements can be found.  Its a foreign government owned company and its the owners responsibility to ensure its survival .

 

At least you have stopped banging on about global warming which is a totally different subject.  The operating of the railways was privatised years ago, due to the pandemic arrangements have been made to ensure an adequate service is maintained for internal franchises. Hardly standing back and gloating.

 

According to the Bank of England the recovery this year looks very promising, its our governments duty is to get GB PLC up and sprinting. If the TOC collapses the UK should ensure trains run, but not to prop up another countries state aided railway company

A bit late joining this conversation, but the UK government does just that. How many TOCs are foreign owned? Arriva Trains DB; C2C-Trenitalia; Abellio NS..all foreign railways where the majority shareholder is a foreign government. So in effect we are already subsidising foreign railways.

 

[hayfield]

16 hours ago, phil-b259 said:

 

 

You still don't get the point - we are not talking about an all stations train from Edinburgh to France!

 

We are talking about a Manchester or Birmingham to London express service (with limited calls at places like Rugby or Stockport as per current practice) which is then extended to France!

 

In effect the Eurostar replaces one of the train paths used by LNER, Avanti to London. London passengers could simply alight at St Pancras or Stratford International and be replaced with international travellers from London the costs of running the train are therefore covered by those breaking the journey in London  - not just those few end to end travellers!

 

You are basically linking two express services together so people don't have to lug themselves and their luggage thorough UK border facilities in London making the whole experience of traveling to Europe virtually seamless.

 

Exact stopping patterns would needless to say be something of a trail and error situation and its quite possible that some would be taken away and others added based on ticket and ridership data - so any any examples I have given thus far are purely illustrative.

 

As for South Eastern or Oui Go already providing services - it has long been my belief (backed up by much real world analysis) that competition for rail passengers is with road and air transport. Very few routes are suitable for rail on rail competition (London to Birmingham being a notably exception where it works) and direct competition on the same corridors represents a wasteful squandering of railway capacity.

 

Thus if domestic passengers could use Eurostars as far as Ashford and change onto SE services there it would help the business case of stopping some more Eurostars there - which in turn means that Ashford becomes a much more attractive point for folk to catch Eurostar from and helps drive up the potential usage*.

 

* International rail services are not immune to the effects of frequent services - just as ridership on the north London line or the Turo branch line has increased massively as a result of a more frequent service, the same effect can also be seen on international trains within Europes Schengen zone

 

 

 

Whatever the rights or wrongs we are not in the Schengen agreement and like all other international  transport there has to be a customs point somewhere, but unlike air travel the rail connections have one customs check not two, as it happens there is also a custom's check on the trains between France and Italy mainly on the move between two stations on the border

 

Even on the TGV and Italian fast lines some exchanges do involve a bit of a treck from one side of the station to the other, airports are even larger and if a plane change is concerned you may have the added issues of retrieving your bags. Not every city has a joined up rail network, I have even had a trip by coach between the 2 Milan stations.

 

For business travel it may not be a convenient method, also those with children journeys with several change of trains may be very inconvenient. But on environmental reasons traveling by train is far greener, and for those who enjoy a leisurely journey (if you call travelling at 200k to 300k per hour)  taking in the views of the country side and perhaps a nice stop over enroute, its a far more pleasurable experience. 

 

 

[Ron Ron Ron]

10 hours ago, roythebus1 said:

A bit late joining this conversation, but the UK government does just that. How many TOCs are foreign owned? Arriva Trains DB; C2C-Trenitalia; Abellio NS..all foreign railways where the majority shareholder is a foreign government. So in effect we are already subsidising foreign railways.

 

I thought there was quite a bit of controversy in the Netherlands over Abellio’s loss making operations in the U.K.?

The issue being that NS, or the Netherlands government, are effectively subsidising rail operations in the U.K.

 

Incidentally, the foreign ownership argument was being used only a few years ago, particularly by a certain opposition party promoting “ re- nationalisation “, whatever that means,.

This was a gross distortion of the truth.

At that time, which was before the WC, EC, MML and SWML franchises changed hands, foreign ownership was actually limited to under 18% of all franchises and open-access.

The main WCML, ECML, GWML, MML, SWML TOCs, plus C2C and HT, were all run by U.K. companies (First, Stagecoach, Virgin) until they changed hands in recent times.

100% DB owned XC, ATW, Chiltern & GC which are relatively small operators, were obviously not.

Govia operators Southern, SET & the former LM were only about 22% foreign owned., etc, etc.

 

Obviously that situation has now changed, since various franchises have been re-let, with more foreign train operators coming in.

That doesn’t alter the fact that the “foreign run” argument was being totally exaggerated, bordering on lies, until quite recently.

.

 

[hayfield]

15 hours ago, phil-b259 said:

 

What is so hard to understand.

 

UK immigration policy PREVENTS Eurostar from even TRYING regional Eurostar services! Whether commercial demand (or its socially desirable to subsidise such services) makes the thing viable is rather irrelevant if the law prohibits it anyway!

 

Hence any discussion over Eurostar's potential cannot be carried out without referencing UK immigration policy.

 

Its a bit like someone discussing what car they want to buy when they are banned from holding a driving licence for medical reasons!

 

Its hardly going to be a revelation that I think current policy stinks and the little Englander mentality is ruining the country - but in a democracy everyone is of course entitled to their own view on the matter.

 

What I cannot stomach however is the pretence of some, both on here and elsewhere who seems to think that matters pertaining to Eurostar can be carried out without any reference to the massively restrictive border policy in place. 

 

It is accepted that Eurostar (before the Pandemic hit) was doing a good job of catering for Three Capitals' users within current border / immigration / free movement policies - and if you feel that the current border regime should stay in place then that is as much as can be hoped for from Eurostar in future.

 

What a load of bunkum, our boarder policy is exactly the same as every other country in the world, with the exception of where there are special local arrangements, we have one with the Republic of Ireland. Thankfully we live in a democracy and even when we were in the EU we never were in Schengen. Red herring. The customs arrangements both ways on Eurostar is easier than any other port of exit/entry (its one check not two !!)

 

The main issue is accessing the rail networks at both ends for onward journey. Given the whole world is being challenged by climate challenge, why not charge air passengers for polluting our world and subsidize international rail travel

[corneliuslundie]

Sorry John, but you are wrong at least concerning one border (between the EEC and a non  EEC country too). I have travelled between Italy and Switzerland by train and the only check was on the move, with the staff moving through the train to see passports and tickets. I can't speak for journeys between other countries.

And on foreign ownership, wasn't DB also unhappy about losses in the UK where it is involved in both rail and buses?

Jonathan

[hayfield]

1 minute ago, corneliuslundie said:

Sorry John, but you are wrong at least concerning one border (between the EEC and a non  EEC country too). I have travelled between Italy and Switzerland by train and the only check was on the move, with the staff moving through the train to see passports and tickets. I can't speak for journeys between other countries.

And on foreign ownership, wasn't DB also unhappy about losses in the UK where it is involved in both rail and buses?

Jonathan

 

You are correct for the link between Italy to Switzerland and Switzerland to France

 

But every time I have traveled from France stopping over/via at Chambery to either Turin or Milan the train stops at the last French station where the Italian guards get on, the train carries on to the first Italian station, during the journey the border officials check all passports and the train does not leave the Italian station until the checks have been completed. My last journey was June 2019. Never done the return trip as always returned via Switzerland stopping over at Mulhouse. No idea if there are checks from Switzerland to Italy  

[Ron Ron Ron]

It is absolutely normal and necessary for nation states to have some form of border control.

The Schengen arrangements are quite unique, on the scale they operate.

The U.K. and Ireland have never been part of that arrangement, for very good, practical reasons.

Even if the U.K. had elected to remain as part of the EU, joining in with Schengen would have produced some very serious problems for our nation.

Even within Schengen, borders have been closed and strict border checks have been re-activated, when certain circumstances have warranted it. For example the mass wave of migration from Syria and many other countries in that region, a few years ago.

More recently, the pandemic has led to border closures and restrictions on personal travel.

 

[hayfield]

18 minutes ago, hayfield said:

 

You are correct for the link between Italy to Switzerland and Switzerland to France

 

But every time I have traveled from France stopping over/via at Chambery to either Turin or Milan the train stops at the last French station where the Italian guards get on, the train carries on to the first Italian station, during the journey the border officials check all passports and the train does not leave the Italian station until the checks have been completed. My last journey was June 2019. Never done the return trip as always returned via Switzerland stopping over at Mulhouse. No idea if there are checks from Switzerland to Italy  

 

 

The checks were between Modane and Bardonecchia

[Oldddudders]

My limited use of trains within mainland Europe has been formality-free. Joining a train in Bruxelles to go to Köln, and vice versa, included nothing about passports, any more than driving from France into Belgium, Luxembourg or Germany ever has. 

[phil-b259]

1 hour ago, hayfield said:

 

What a load of bunkum, our boarder policy is exactly the same as every other country in the world, with the exception of where there are special local arrangements, we have one with the Republic of Ireland. Thankfully we live in a democracy and even when we were in the EU we never were in Schengen. Red herring. The customs arrangements both ways on Eurostar is easier than any other port of exit/entry (its one check not two !!)

 

The main issue is accessing the rail networks at both ends for onward journey. Given the whole world is being challenged by climate challenge, why not charge air passengers for polluting our world and subsidize international rail travel

 

No it isn't

 

You are obviously clueless of the details of how the Schengen Treaty works (routine border checks between participating states are BANNED!)

 

The juxtaposed border controls in the UK & France may be better for the traveller than being processed separately at either end of the journey but its a FACT that you still have to be processed in the first place - unlike within the CTA or within the Schengen zone where folk are at total freedom to wander across borders at will

 

That processing adds cost as well as restricting the way travel options can be offered by providers however you try and dress it up. The desire to travel drops away sharply if the perceived (note the deliberate use of that word) hassle becomes grater than the end reward.

 

So you can make 'accessing' the terminals as easy as you like that that aim (as laudable as it is) does NOTHING to alter the fundamental FACT that the need to gather all travellers in one place and spend time 'processing them through border controls' (and now customs thanks to Brexit) is a massive drag on the ability of transport providers to extend the reach of services beyond said hubs.

 

As a UK citizen you may well believe that a 'tough' approach to the UK border controls (as campaigned for by certain sections of the press and political groupings) is what the UK needs - but have the guts to admit your stance is a POLITICAL decision and not one supported by a factual analysis of what joining the Schengen agreement (i.e. extending the CTA already in place with Ireland) would do with respect to opening up options / possibilities for businesses to innovate and expand of international rail travel to / from the UK.

 

 

 

 

[phil-b259]

1 hour ago, hayfield said:

 

You are correct for the link between Italy to Switzerland and Switzerland to France

 

But every time I have traveled from France stopping over/via at Chambery to either Turin or Milan the train stops at the last French station where the Italian guards get on, the train carries on to the first Italian station, during the journey the border officials check all passports and the train does not leave the Italian station until the checks have been completed. My last journey was June 2019. Never done the return trip as always returned via Switzerland stopping over at Mulhouse. No idea if there are checks from Switzerland to Italy  

 

That practice is ILLEGAL under the Schengen agreement outside of 'National Emergencies' and the EU gas been heavily critical / threatened legal action where countries have continued to implement such practices for months on end (the Treaty allows a maximum of 6 months IIRC)

 

A lot of such checks were imposed as a result of the Migrant crisis of 2015 and there has been an obvious reluctance to withdraw them by some states - mostly due to worries over the political ramifications at the ballot box from nationalistic / far right entities.

 

As you note this introduces delays in cross border train services and although being checked on board is better for travellers than being marched off to a processing facility and less disruptive business wise than the 'international only' passenger rule the UK remains wedded to, it still has the potential to dissuade passengers from travelling, hitting revenues, profitability and ultimately the viability of the service.

 

 

 

Edited May 8, 2021 by phil-b259