Billions spent on Eurostar rail link to reduce London to Paris journey times by 20 minutes. Is it worth it?

Question

Billions spent on Eurostar rail link to reduce London to Paris journey times by 20 minutes. Is it worth it?

Answer 1

The money wasn't spent just to reduce the Eurostar journey time. That's the headline item because the press & tv don't bother to give full reports.

You should read the specialist railway magazines for the full story.



Basically:

The Waterloo terminus was not capable of expansion so further trans-European services could not be accommdated.

St Pancras is able to take more trains so more destinations will be on offer in due course.



Waterloo is congested so the release of the Eurostar terminal to domestic services will improve the train performance and punctuality at the station. (Don't be tempted to say "oh yeah", it will make a difference).



The old route to Waterloo is not able to accept trains of the larger European loading guages. Now it is possible for a foreign high-speed train to make its way direct to London. (More future services again, when they recover from the shock of getting this one right).



The Waterloo lines are fed from third rail DC power supply. This meant that the Eurostars had to be fitted with retractible 'shoes' for power pick-up as well as roof-top pantographs. This is an expensive complication for maintenance on the trains. They have now been removed. The low voltage DC also severely restricted the England-side speed.



St Pancras station itself is a Listed Building and needed millions spent on it to stop it becoming dangerous. As this money was going to be spent on the building anyway it made sense to spend relatively little extra and develop the railway station itsef.



The high-speed line now goes north of London thus enabling future through-freight (some at the enhance loading guage) trains from what's left of the industrial North to pass direct to Europe.



There's more, but you can see that the money wasn't just spent to save a few commuters 20 minutes. Even if there was a smaller time saving most of it would have had to be done anyway.

Answer 2

Its about 40 minutes - if you include phase 1 from the tunnel to Northfleet in Kent (just outside the M25), the section that has just opened is phase 2 (the tunnel under the Thames into St Pancras) on an originally 3 hour journey that is some saving



I think the UK should adopt an ICE (German Intercity Express) style network, with a combination of improving existing routes and building new bypasses so freight doesn't have to thread its way through busy commuter networks, and high speed sections where it is not possible to upgrade existing track. Every minor speed upgrade (eg an extra 5-10mph through a bend, some extra freight loops so that expresses don't get held up) adds up to quite a boost to the trains average speed.



I do question the logic of Cross Rail costing 16billion for a few miles of commutor railway. A High Speed route from London to Birmingham (with provision for extentions further north to be built later) was costed at 15billion recently

Answer 3

Yes it is worth it; the new high speed line will also be used by domestic high speed trains between various towns in Kent and London. The vast amount of extra passengers using the train between London and France and Belguim will reduce pollution caused by aeroplanes and car trips to the airport, as well as helping economic development. There is a possibility that through trains will run to Holland and Germany as well in the next few years further freeing up runways at airports for longer distance flights and creating seamless city centre to city centre journeys between London and other European capitals

Answer 4

If you consider that the train competes with a flight (especially when talking about city centre to city centre) - then it has to be - the more flights that can be reduced will assist all that cash being spent in the name of reducing global warming.



If you've travelled the tunnel, either by eurostar or what used to be called eurotunnel, you'll know that for this part of the country its a good way to travel.



As noted earlier, we need to get the fast lines across the country - and then reduce the cost of travelling on them!



And finally, with the olympics in 2012 there'll be a few hundred thousand who can travel to them, from france, FOR THE DAY!







HURRAY!

Answer 5

You know we in the railway will always loose because everything that we do in the public eyes is wrong.

We build something or fix something and its Wrong,

we do not build something or fix something else we are wrong!



And in answer to somebody Else's comment. There are plans for a high speed link between the North & South, but it will be 2020 before anything come of it. Look at how long the Thameslink & Cross Rail projects took to get off the ground, because people in the goverment kept saying NO.



The railways are putting pressure on the goverment to give the go-a-head for the North South Line, but they (the goverment) will say yes in their own time!

Answer 6

Basically yes. It means that area of London will receive an influx of new business opportunities and it also means that rail will be more competitive with air travel and thus helping to tackle global warming. Now that we have London to Paris high speed link we must now push north to Scotland with a Glasgow to London High Speed Line.

Answer 7

My gripe is that all this money gets spent on the high-speed links to bring the trunk route service up to speed with our European partners, but local and cross-country services get neglected.



Compare that with, say, Germany which has an ultra-modern high speed system on trunk routes, but has better local and regional services as well. Ditto France.



Little surprise then that Britain, with comparable levels of car ownership to other European countries, has the most intensive car usage. In many places local/regional train services are inadequate or non-existent.

Answer 8

Yes, because it means we can kick more dodgy French people out of the country 20 minutes faster.





;-)

Answer 9

It always seems to be worth it as long as it's in London.



Shame the rest of the country never see the same investment in infrastructure that our Southern compatriots receive.

Answer 10

I suppose it's worth it if you're trying to get OUT of Paris.

Answer 11

People constantly moan that we have no high speed lines in this country and now we have got one people are moaning about the cost.



The cost is why we don't have more of them.

Answer 12

I thought it was 40 minutes, each way.

Answer 13

Its for quick access for the migrants inter city link.

Answer 14

Time is money. How fast do you want to go?

Answer 15

better value than the £25.000.000 pond that bradford was going to build

Answer 16

no