French State Council backs Bordeaux - Toulouse/Dax high-speed lines

[DavidB-AU]

THE French Ministry of the Environment, Energy, and the Sea confirmed on May 25 that the Council of State of has approved a draft decree granting public utility status for the €8.3bn Grand Southwestern Railway Project (GPSO), which will extend TGV Sud-Europ Atlantique from Bordeaux to Toulouse with a branch to Dax.

 

http://www.railjournal.com/index.php/high-speed/french-state-council-backs-bordeaux-toulouse-dax-high-speed-lines.html

[Joseph_Pestell]

THE French Ministry of the Environment, Energy, and the Sea confirmed on May 25 that the Council of State of has approved a draft decree granting public utility status for the €8.3bn Grand Southwestern Railway Project (GPSO), which will extend TGV Sud-Europ Atlantique from Bordeaux to Toulouse with a branch to Dax.

 

http://www.railjournal.com/index.php/high-speed/french-state-council-backs-bordeaux-toulouse-dax-high-speed-lines.html

An interesting announcement on the day that the report on HS2 costs has been released. €8.3bn is indeed a tiny amount compared with Phase 1 of HS2 and for a greater distance of railway (albeit without much by way of new stations).

[JeffP]

I can see them Linking Toulouse to the Med coast at Narbonne, yet.

 

They do seem to have a more can-do attitude than our lot, work more quickly when it starts and seem to be able to do it cheaper......

[Andy Hayter]

They also have a legal system that makes objection (particularly objection based solely on Nimbyism) much more difficult and much more costly for the individual. 

 

I saw yesterday that of someting like 300 objections to Fracking in Kikby Misperton, only 40 odd related to objections that the planning committee could actually take into account.  In France the 260 "non relevant objections" would simply be dismissed with a "Non".  Insteadt the UK insists that they all have to be heard at all levels of discussion.

[JeffP]

I once camped near to beziers for three years running during the summer holidays.

 

We went down the N9 from Clermont Ferrand, using the new free A75 where it was built.

 

During those three years, the French pushed the BRAND NEW A75 a total of over 50 miles, building viaducts, tunnels, rest areas and service areas, plus loads of junctions, and at heights of up to 1140m.

 

We built 12 miles of motorway from Peterborough to Alconbury, on the flat, with only two junctions, in the same time........

[rue_d_etropal]

The argument sometimes used for taking longer is to actually reduce cost, by getting best quotes, but suspect making a project take longer actually increases cost significantly.

Also France is a lot bigger, so less likely to get nimby isms. I seem to remember towns were actually trying to get lines closer rather than further from them.

The big problem with HS2 here, is that not many of us actually want it, but if it was actually a fast link to France then it would be more appealing. For links just to London, re-opening the GCR and MR lines would be better and cheaper. Sorry then about preserved lines, but real working railways come first.

The fracking debate should not be mixed into the argument though, as it is totally different. Just that only way to object was via planning system.I wonder how many would volunteer for a large chemical plant, or nuclear store/power station in their back yard. Remember that France, after a very short discussion decided to not proceed with fracking at all anywhere.

 

The French do seem to do some transport projects very fast, but the upgrade of one of the old RN roads south from Paris seems to be going very slowly, certainly no faster than any similar project in UK. It is the one which goes near to the French Grand Prix circuit(that section has been open for a while, but stretches either side are currently being built)

[Fat Controller]

THe powers-that-be do seem to be able to buy off neighbouring communities; there are a lot of villages near LGVs that have very grand village halls and excellent sports facilities. There are places where there has been quite vocal opposition to rail projects; currently the proposed freight bypass of the Lyon agglomeration is being strongly opposed. Part of this opposition is rather ill-informed; we lunched at my god-daughter's mother's place, which is between Feyzin refinery and Sibelin, a couple of weeks ago, and got chatting to the others about relative safety. They were saying that 'no-one knows what's on the trains',so they got a brief explanation of the rules regarding loads and loading, the meaning of the Hazchem panel, and the rôle of the 'fiche du train'. They were quite blasé about the risk from the refinery, and associated chemical plants as 'they have an exercise once a year'

[Focalplane]

This is good news that the Bordeaux Toulouse sector will be improved to LGV status.  Particularly for Toulouse which is poorly served by fast train services to Paris.  However, I think the Toulousains have got so used to driving everywhere they may not be so easily persuaded to use the trains.  I recently drove down A61 from Toulouse to Narbonne on a Sunday afternoon.  The westbound traffic jams were horrendous.  The Mediterranean coast is their great escape at weekends and judging by the number of department 31 car registrations this is undeniably true.

 

As JeffP says, the next step would be to extend east to Narbonne.  But the problem is that the LGV from Perpignan to Montpellier via Narbonne seems to be hopelessly stalled at the planning stage while the departments fight over who pays how much and how many stations would they get in return.  Not unlike HS2 the Parisians just think about journey times to Barcelone and rarely give much thought to regional transportation.  So the current plan is stuck with both Herault and Aude having to share one TGV station at Nissan (where I once lived) which is in the middle of not much though it would, like Valence TGV station, cross the existing main line to provide for local connecting services.

 

And now I am on a roll, the SNCF services I used to use have been completely screwed up with poor timetabling.  This seems to have coincided with the Paris-Barcelone direct service.  There was a time when I could take Eurostar from London to Lille, have lunch at the station and then board a direct train to Perpignan via Béziers and Narbonne.  That train now goes to Marseilles with a connection that only goes to Montpellier.  The return journey is even worse.  So I don't bother any more.  Either Easyjet or Brittany Ferries provide competitive services.

[Pacific231G]

Building a completely new LGV between Bordeaux and Dax seems a bit odd since the existing line through the Landes (which was used for the 1955 330km/h high speed trials) should be fairly easy to upgrade to handle near  LGV speeds.

I can't help thinking that there has always been a slight failure of logic in the French LGV/TGV concept possibly based on the Japanese high speed lines. The Japanese HSLs are standard gauge in a country where the main rail network is 3ft 6ins so they had to be new build but in France TGVs can and do use the "classic" network. Nevertheless the thinking still seems to be that nothing less than a fully fledged HSL will do. In Germany by contrast I understand that far more of the high speed network  is based on upgrades to existing main lines so giving the country a high speed rail network at far lower cost.

 

Despite the strikes I travelled yesterday from Bordeaux to Paris by TGV, a route I've travelled on several times before, and the train was coming from Toulouse which was also the destination of my outward train last week. The line between Bordeaux and Tours was clearly unsuitable for upgrading and the new LGV looks to be almost complete with just some OLE work still to do before commissioning starts. The line from Bordeaux to Dax though is a different kettle of fish, mostly dead straight with plenty of space in a fairly empty regon of forests for widening. That would be needed as, apart from TGVs from Bayonne/Biarritz and the Spanish border, the existing line does carry a lot of freight and a reasonable number of local (TER) passenger trains. However, there are no large towns between Bordeaux and Dax; and while a number of level crossings would need to be replaced with bridges that's something that's already in hand across France.  

[Fat Controller]

Whilst the line from Bordeaux to Dax might be suitable for upgrade to carry high speed trains, their maximum speed would be limited by the presence of a not-inconsiderable amount of freight traffic, along with stopping passenger services. You could use the same 'trace' for LGV, parallel to the existing line, but it would have to be some distance away to avoid any possibility of construction machinery wandering off-course on to the working railway. In short, it's probably easier to use a new alignment.

[Pacific231G]

Whilst the line from Bordeaux to Dax might be suitable for upgrade to carry high speed trains, their maximum speed would be limited by the presence of a not-inconsiderable amount of freight traffic, along with stopping passenger services. You could use the same 'trace' for LGV, parallel to the existing line, but it would have to be some distance away to avoid any possibility of construction machinery wandering off-course on to the working railway. In short, it's probably easier to use a new alignment.

How so? Crossrail is being bult alongside the working and far busier GW main line out of Paddington. There are also several places between Bordeaux and Tours where the new LGV crosses and connects with the existing main line and those would have had to be constructed without long term closures. Using an upgrade and probably quadrupling the existing ex Midi line rather than building a dedicated LGV would likely have a lower top speed than 300km/h but building a completely new 120 kms or so of LGV for probably no more than one train an hour each way doesn't sound like a very sound investment.

It would be interesting to compare the cost effectiveness of the French all new LGV policy with the arguably more pragmatic German approach.

 

There is an interesting comparison of the German and French approaches to high speed rail here https://www.google.co.uk/url?sa=t&rct=j&q=&esrc=s&source=web&cd=1&ved=0ahUKEwji9_yaq4zNAhUEJsAKHZDgC2QQFggdMAA&url=http%3A%2F%2Fwww.gmfus.org%2Ffile%2F6093%2Fdownload&usg=AFQjCNFn05Z3XWTztYDeCwDrcLrK8IWNiw&cad=rja

 

It's a study related to the planned high speed rail system in California

[Fat Controller]

How so? Crossrail is being bult alongside the working and far busier GW main line out of Paddington. There are also several places between Bordeaux and Tours where the new LGV crosses and connects with the existing main line and those would have had to be constructed without long term closures. Using an upgrade and probably quadrupling the existing ex Midi line rather than building a dedicated LGV would likely have a lower top speed than 300km/h but building a completely new 120 kms or so of LGV for probably no more than one train an hour each way doesn't sound like a very sound investment.

It would be interesting to compare the cost effectiveness of the French all new LGV policy with the arguably more pragmatic German approach.

 

There is an interesting comparison of the German and French approaches to high speed rail here https://www.google.co.uk/url?sa=t&rct=j&q=&esrc=s&source=web&cd=1&ved=0ahUKEwji9_yaq4zNAhUEJsAKHZDgC2QQFggdMAA&url=http%3A%2F%2Fwww.gmfus.org%2Ffile%2F6093%2Fdownload&usg=AFQjCNFn05Z3XWTztYDeCwDrcLrK8IWNiw&cad=rja

 

It's a study related to the planned high speed rail system in California

Crossrail is being built alongside the GW main line, as it's intended to abstract a lot of the local traffic from it; it's also through a highly-urbanised area, where building a new trace would be very costly. That said, it costs more to build alongside an existing line, than on a new route, simply as there will be many occasions when works on the new trace will impinge, even if only briefly, on the existing.

The German high-speed lines are designed with easier grades than the LGVs, as they're intended to also carry freight.

I agree with your comments about the soundness of the investment, if the line will only be carrying one train per hour.

[Focalplane]

I am fast coming to the conclusion that high speed rail is dictated by politicians for politicians. Proof? Think about the Paris Strasbourg LGV that was built way before the still proposed links to Toulouse (Space City, Aerobus, etc.) or Nice, etc. My needs along with those of many others have been usurped by the European diktat to connect Paris to Spain.