[HN Gopher] How the Channel Tunnel changed Europe (2019)
       ___________________________________________________________________
        
       How the Channel Tunnel changed Europe (2019)
        
       Author : Tomte
       Score  : 31 points
       Date   : 2022-03-30 14:14 UTC (3 days ago)
        
 (HTM) web link (www.cnn.com)
 (TXT) w3m dump (www.cnn.com)
        
       | irrational wrote:
       | How has the use of the Channel Tunnel changed since Brexit? I
       | presume border control has changed significantly. How much more
       | time does it add to the crossing?
        
         | agd wrote:
         | As an individual traveler, not much has changed. You always had
         | to do border control as the UK is not part of Schengen.
         | 
         | However, I imagine things have changed for freight traffic
         | through the tunnel.
        
       | loopbit wrote:
       | Changed Europe? Changed the UK and very little else...
       | 
       | I mean, it's a cool bit of engineering and it took ages to build.
       | But for most people in Europe means nothing.
       | 
       | > "It put international rail travel back in the game"
       | 
       | Yeah, for England. Again, for the rest of Europe, rail travel was
       | always there.
        
         | [deleted]
        
         | sonicggg wrote:
         | Author is British, probably still think they are the main
         | protagonist of the World.
        
           | Animats wrote:
           | "Fog in Channel, continent isolated" - classic British
           | headline
        
       | xyzzyz wrote:
       | > Some 4.5 million UK tourists use the Channel Tunnel every year,
       | with 1.6 million trucks transporting goods.
       | 
       | > "It put international rail travel back in the game," says Mark
       | Smith, founder of rail travel website The Man in Seat 61.
       | 
       | I don't know what game is international rail in UK playing, but
       | most certainly it's a losing one. 4.5 million passengers is only
       | a quarter of what London Luton airport is seen annually, which
       | itself is only fifth most popular airport in UK. Quite
       | apparently, very few travelers choose rail, relative to airlines.
        
         | steffandroid wrote:
         | "4.5 million UK tourists" is not the same as total passengers.
         | Individual tourists can make multiple journeys, and overseas
         | tourists are excluded from this figure. Over 20 million
         | passengers use the tunnel annually.
        
         | lostlogin wrote:
         | It's a shame they choose air over rail. We chose air when cash
         | strapped, but the train was superior in every other way. We
         | arrived in the middle of the city we wanted to go to, it was
         | quicker to get there and there way space and comfort. 10/10
         | from me.
         | 
         | Time in an airport is a waste of life from my perspective.
        
           | yodsanklai wrote:
           | London - Paris is fast and convenient indeed. But train
           | becomes slower as soon as you need to catch a connection in
           | Paris. I don't like airports either, but I'd rather spend
           | time in an airport than in a train station and Paris subway
           | with all my luggage.
           | 
           | That being said, train should be the preferred option due to
           | lower CO2 emissions. It's a shame prices don't reflect that.
        
             | lostlogin wrote:
             | > I'd rather spend time in an airport than in a train
             | station and Paris subway with all my luggage.
             | 
             | But once the plane lands you then need to get on a train or
             | brave a taxi. Having tried the taxi, that's out.
        
             | cameronh90 wrote:
             | Trains are just really expensive, sadly.
             | 
             | Trains are subsidised in most places, either by publicly
             | funding the huge amounts of infrastructure required, or by
             | subsidising the operations. Meanwhile air travel is usually
             | taxed overall. Yet despite this, flying is often less than
             | half the cost of a train.
             | 
             | I'm all for taxing air travel CO2, but I suspect it would
             | lead to quicker zero carbon fuel rather than more rail
             | travel long term.
        
               | lostlogin wrote:
               | Air travel is often directly subsidised too. Airline
               | bailouts happen, and the the use of land, pollution of
               | the air and the noise they cause are not paid for in
               | full.
        
         | JimDabell wrote:
         | Why is this surprising? You can get to dozens of different
         | countries in a few hours by flying from Luton. Unless you're
         | counting Northern Ireland to Ireland, all international rail
         | journeys go through France and take much longer.
         | 
         | You can go for a cheap holiday to Alicante in a few hours from
         | Luton. How long would that take by train? It's quick and easy
         | to get all around Europe by train if you live in, say, Germany.
         | Simple geography rules that out for the UK.
        
           | fabioborellini wrote:
           | It takes roughly the same time to reach Spain from London and
           | southwest Germany, though. Meaning that London is closer to
           | Spain by rail than most of Germany. Eurostar and (the rest
           | of) the French high speed network really compensate some
           | simple geography.
           | 
           | Of course the journeys to southern Spain take too long to
           | appeal the mainstream, and it is easier to purchase plane
           | tickets, too.
           | 
           | To answer your question, it takes 12 hours to reach Barcelona
           | from London and a few more the next day to reach Alicante...
        
             | ginnungagap wrote:
             | > Eurostar and (the rest of) the French high speed network
             | really compensate some simple geography.
             | 
             | Wouldn't German travelers also take advantage of French
             | high speed trains when travelling to Spain?
        
               | alexanderchr wrote:
               | Problem is you have to go through Paris du to the way the
               | French HSR is built. And time-wise London is closer to
               | Paris than most German cities.
        
               | ginnungagap wrote:
               | Makes sense, the French railway metric strikes again...
        
         | spzb wrote:
         | Eurostar trains, as opposed to the drive-on-drive-off
         | Eurotunnel ones, have always been prohibitively expensive
         | whenever I've looked at them. Maybe it's a viable option for
         | the London, Paris, Brussels executives who put it on expenses
         | but for us plebs it's cheaper to fly or drive.
        
           | johannes1234321 wrote:
           | Flying by plane is incredible cheap compared to railway not
           | only on that connection unfortunately.
           | 
           | The plane business is extremely cost effective organized (not
           | only thanks to cheap players like RyanAir) and benefits a lot
           | from state sponsored infrastructure (airports, ATC) and
           | subsidized resources (no Kerosene tax) compared to railways
           | which need more infrastructure (tracks everywhere instead of
           | "simply" using air) and need to refinance having trains going
           | "everywhere"
           | 
           | The railway ticket to and from the airport is almost more
           | expensive than a flight across the continent ...
        
             | desas wrote:
             | I'm flying from the north of the continent to the south
             | soon (Manchester to Sicily, Sicily to Gatwick). My train
             | tickets to get to and from the airports in the UK are
             | PS160, my air tickets are PS120
        
       | netsharc wrote:
       | > French engineer Albert Mathieu-Flavier first proposed a
       | subterranean link between Britain and France in 1802, suggesting
       | the creation of an artificial island in the English Channel for
       | trains to change the horses that would be required to pull the
       | carriages.
       | 
       | I wonder if there are right-hand-riding horses and left-hand-
       | riding horses, i.e. horses that are used to galloping on one
       | particular side of the road.
        
       | bob2222 wrote:
        
       ___________________________________________________________________
       (page generated 2022-04-02 23:01 UTC)