In message <5I4rUMH7zdSiFAkL@perry.uk>, at 18:44:27 on Sun, 3 Apr 2022,
Roland Perry <roland@perry.co.uk> remarked:
>In message <t2ciim$85l$1@dont-email.me>, at 16:38:46 on Sun, 3 Apr
>2022, Sam Wilson <ukr@dummy.wislons.fastmail.co.uk> remarked:
>>Roland Perry <roland@perry.co.uk> wrote:
>>> In message <t2cdv5$a3l$1@dont-email.me>, at 15:20:05 on Sun, 3 Apr 2022,
>>> Recliner <recliner.usenet@gmail.com> remarked:
>>>> Roland Perry <roland@perry.co.uk> wrote:
>>>>> In message <w8idnbb-Nv0IAdT_nZ2dnUU7-d-dnZ2d@brightview.co.uk>, at
>>>>> 14:09:42 on Sun, 3 Apr 2022, Arthur Figgis <afiggis@example.invalid>
>>>>> remarked:
>>>>>>> Any such trains would have to be dedicated to unaccompanied trailers
>>>>>>> and new methods of loading / unloading would need to be invented
>>>>>>
>>>>>> They would just use the methods which are quite happily being used on
>>>>>> the Continent.
>>>>>
>>>>> Would I be correct in thinking there aren't matching facilities in the
>>>>> UK, nor has anyone built and approved the new style of freight train for
>>>>> the tunnel?
>>>>
>>>> I'm not clear why different freight shuttle wagons would be needed?
>>>
>>> The loading/unloading facility in one of the earlier videos showed the
>>> containers being skated sideways onto open trucks.
>
>Trucks = railway wagons, if we prefer.
>
>>Err… I’ve lost the video but I think it was trailers rather than
>>containers
>>that were being skated sideways.
>
>Damn those invisible words!
>
>Yes, the containers were still on their trailers. I wonder if they also
>do curtain-sided trailers, tankers and so on?

And the answer is "yes".

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=M7Xx7AC9Zaw
--
Roland Perry

Sam Wilson <ukr@dummy.wislons.fastmail.co.uk> wrote:
> Roland Perry <roland@perry.co.uk> wrote:
>> In message <t2cdv5$a3l$1@dont-email.me>, at 15:20:05 on Sun, 3 Apr 2022,
>> Recliner <recliner.usenet@gmail.com> remarked:
>>> Roland Perry <roland@perry.co.uk> wrote:
>>>> In message <w8idnbb-Nv0IAdT_nZ2dnUU7-d-dnZ2d@brightview.co.uk>, at
>>>> 14:09:42 on Sun, 3 Apr 2022, Arthur Figgis <afiggis@example.invalid>
>>>> remarked:
>>>>>> Any such trains would have to be dedicated to unaccompanied trailers
>>>>>> and new methods of loading / unloading would need to be invented
>>>>>
>>>>> They would just use the methods which are quite happily being used on
>>>>> the Continent.
>>>>
>>>> Would I be correct in thinking there aren't matching facilities in the
>>>> UK, nor has anyone built and approved the new style of freight train for
>>>> the tunnel?
>>>
>>> I'm not clear why different freight shuttle wagons would be needed?
>>
>> The loading/unloading facility in one of the earlier videos showed the
>> containers being skated sideways onto open trucks.
>
> Err… I’ve lost the video but I think it was trailers rather than containers
> that were being skated sideways.
>
> Sam
>

Was it the one I posted on the Cargobeamer system ?
Shows how their system works at Calais and other terminals on the Continent
works .

<https://youtu.be/3MkdqvXv2lw>

For Container substitute the word Cradle or maybe skid, the trailer is
hauled onto one and the tractor unit or tug drives off . This is done on a
dedicated platform area where such trailers on cradles are pre positioned
adjacent to where a Cargobeamer railway wagon designed for the task will
be when the train pulls in . The cradles and the trailers upon them are
moved sideways onto the railway wagons by a mechanism that has been built
into the platform area. Off loading is a reversal of the process.

What both Cargobeamer and their partner Getlink (nee Eurotunnel) are
being coy about and havn’t given details of is how the operation through
the tunnel is going to work as so far they have not built such a loading
/unloading area . So far it appears they intend to unload trailers from the
Cargobeamer
trains at Calais connect a normal tractor unit to them and drive them onto
the Eurotunnel shuttle
which travels to Folkestone tunnel terminal, from there they are taken onto
a facility at Ashford as Folkestone doesn’t have enough room to park up
unaccompanied trailers.

That they have to travel from the tunnel terminal at Folkestone to Ashford
along public highways means that use of dock style trailer shunter tugs may
not be ideal so if they have brought in a fleet
of normal lorry tractors then the loading onto the shuttle will be as it is
for other traffic and the whole travels through the tunnel like any other
artic with drivers brought it in for the task.
Presumably if the service attracts enough custom then somewhere a dedicated
Cargobeamer area will be built and their own rail wagons moved through the
Tunnel.

What this service is not doing and is not trying to do is is provide an
unaccompanied trailer service just through the tunnel, it is an add on to
long unaccompanied trailer movements across europe where for the time being
the UK segment is done by road in the normal manner on the existing
shuttles.

GH

Roland Perry <roland@perry.co.uk> wrote:
> In message <t2ciim$85l$1@dont-email.me>, at 16:38:46 on Sun, 3 Apr 2022,
> Sam Wilson <ukr@dummy.wislons.fastmail.co.uk> remarked:
>> Roland Perry <roland@perry.co.uk> wrote:
>>> In message <t2cdv5$a3l$1@dont-email.me>, at 15:20:05 on Sun, 3 Apr 2022,
>>> Recliner <recliner.usenet@gmail.com> remarked:
>>>> Roland Perry <roland@perry.co.uk> wrote:
>>>>> In message <w8idnbb-Nv0IAdT_nZ2dnUU7-d-dnZ2d@brightview.co.uk>, at
>>>>> 14:09:42 on Sun, 3 Apr 2022, Arthur Figgis <afiggis@example.invalid>
>>>>> remarked:
>>>>>>> Any such trains would have to be dedicated to unaccompanied trailers
>>>>>>> and new methods of loading / unloading would need to be invented
>>>>>>
>>>>>> They would just use the methods which are quite happily being used on
>>>>>> the Continent.
>>>>>
>>>>> Would I be correct in thinking there aren't matching facilities in the
>>>>> UK, nor has anyone built and approved the new style of freight train for
>>>>> the tunnel?
>>>>
>>>> I'm not clear why different freight shuttle wagons would be needed?
>>>
>>> The loading/unloading facility in one of the earlier videos showed the
>>> containers being skated sideways onto open trucks.
>
> Trucks = railway wagons, if we prefer.
>
>> Err… I’ve lost the video but I think it was trailers rather than containers
>> that were being skated sideways.
>
> Damn those invisible words!
>
> Yes, the containers were still on their trailers. I wonder if they also
> do curtain-sided trailers, tankers and so on?

I thought they might have been box trailers rather than container flats,
but as I say I’ve lost the video in the morass of postings. Box trailers
are common on multimode trains in videos I’ve seen of the US.

Sam

--
The entity formerly known as Sam.Wilson@ed.ac.uk
Spit the dummy to reply

Roland Perry <roland@perry.co.uk> wrote:
> In message <5I4rUMH7zdSiFAkL@perry.uk>, at 18:44:27 on Sun, 3 Apr 2022,
> Roland Perry <roland@perry.co.uk> remarked:
>> In message <t2ciim$85l$1@dont-email.me>, at 16:38:46 on Sun, 3 Apr
>> 2022, Sam Wilson <ukr@dummy.wislons.fastmail.co.uk> remarked:
>>> Roland Perry <roland@perry.co.uk> wrote:
>>>> In message <t2cdv5$a3l$1@dont-email.me>, at 15:20:05 on Sun, 3 Apr 2022,
>>>> Recliner <recliner.usenet@gmail.com> remarked:
>>>>> Roland Perry <roland@perry.co.uk> wrote:
>>>>>> In message <w8idnbb-Nv0IAdT_nZ2dnUU7-d-dnZ2d@brightview.co.uk>, at
>>>>>> 14:09:42 on Sun, 3 Apr 2022, Arthur Figgis <afiggis@example.invalid>
>>>>>> remarked:
>>>>>>>> Any such trains would have to be dedicated to unaccompanied trailers
>>>>>>>> and new methods of loading / unloading would need to be invented
>>>>>>>
>>>>>>> They would just use the methods which are quite happily being used on
>>>>>>> the Continent.
>>>>>>
>>>>>> Would I be correct in thinking there aren't matching facilities in the
>>>>>> UK, nor has anyone built and approved the new style of freight train for
>>>>>> the tunnel?
>>>>>
>>>>> I'm not clear why different freight shuttle wagons would be needed?
>>>>
>>>> The loading/unloading facility in one of the earlier videos showed the
>>>> containers being skated sideways onto open trucks.
>>
>> Trucks = railway wagons, if we prefer.
>>
>>> Err… I’ve lost the video but I think it was trailers rather than
>>> containers
>>> that were being skated sideways.
>>
>> Damn those invisible words!
>>
>> Yes, the containers were still on their trailers. I wonder if they also
>> do curtain-sided trailers, tankers and so on?
>
> And the answer is "yes".
>
> https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=M7Xx7AC9Zaw

I didn’t spot any standard containers in that video. I did see box
trailers, including reefers, curtain sides and a container tank, so I guess
standard containers and tank trailers might also be carried.

Sam

--
The entity formerly known as Sam.Wilson@ed.ac.uk
Spit the dummy to reply

ColinR <rail@greystane.shetland.co.uk> wrote:
> On 03/04/2022 16:20, Recliner wrote:
>> Roland Perry <roland@perry.co.uk> wrote:
>>> In message <w8idnbb-Nv0IAdT_nZ2dnUU7-d-dnZ2d@brightview.co.uk>, at
>>> 14:09:42 on Sun, 3 Apr 2022, Arthur Figgis <afiggis@example.invalid>
>>> remarked:
>>>>> Any such trains would have to be dedicated to unaccompanied trailers
>>>>> and new methods of loading / unloading would need to be invented
>>>>
>>>> They would just use the methods which are quite happily being used on
>>>> the Continent.
>>>
>>> Would I be correct in thinking there aren't matching facilities in the
>>> UK, nor has anyone built and approved the new style of freight train for
>>> the tunnel?
>>
>> I'm not clear why different freight shuttle wagons would be needed?
>>
>
> Normal freight shuttle, drive in, park, next artic follows, parks, next
> artic follows, park etc.
>
> With unaccompanied trailers they need to be backed on (full length of
> train to start, reducing as the train fills), dropped, tractor unit then
> needs to drive back up the full length of train before next trailer can
> be backed down etc.
>
> Very different process so current shuttle trains not practicable as the
> dropping process is very time consuming. Better to be done elsewhere
> where more space is available.
>

But the trains can't leave the Eurotunnel network, they're too tall and too
wide.

So that leaves three options:

1) A captive fleet of tractor units which travel with the trailers aboard
the train

2) New or rebuilt train(s) which allow the tractor unit to uncouple and
leave the train

3) New wagons which can accommodate the trailer within a loading gauge
suitable for travelling beyond the Eurotunnel network. These already exist
for other flows in Europe, but presumably won't fit UK loading gauge other
than HS1.

For a 'proof of concept' trial, the first option seems most likely.

Anna Noyd-Dryver

Recliner <recliner.usenet@gmail.com> wrote:
> ColinR <rail@greystane.shetland.co.uk> wrote:
>> On 03/04/2022 16:20, Recliner wrote:
>>> Roland Perry <roland@perry.co.uk> wrote:
>>>> In message <w8idnbb-Nv0IAdT_nZ2dnUU7-d-dnZ2d@brightview.co.uk>, at
>>>> 14:09:42 on Sun, 3 Apr 2022, Arthur Figgis <afiggis@example.invalid>
>>>> remarked:
>>>>>> Any such trains would have to be dedicated to unaccompanied trailers
>>>>>> and new methods of loading / unloading would need to be invented
>>>>>
>>>>> They would just use the methods which are quite happily being used on
>>>>> the Continent.
>>>>
>>>> Would I be correct in thinking there aren't matching facilities in the
>>>> UK, nor has anyone built and approved the new style of freight train for
>>>> the tunnel?
>>>
>>> I'm not clear why different freight shuttle wagons would be needed?
>>>
>>
>> Normal freight shuttle, drive in, park, next artic follows, parks, next
>> artic follows, park etc.
>>
>> With unaccompanied trailers they need to be backed on (full length of
>> train to start, reducing as the train fills), dropped, tractor unit then
>> needs to drive back up the full length of train before next trailer can
>> be backed down etc.
>>
>> Very different process so current shuttle trains not practicable as the
>> dropping process is very time consuming. Better to be done elsewhere
>> where more space is available.
>>
>
> Why such unnecessary complexity? Just use temporary, small shunting
> tractor units to haul the trailers on to standard freight shuttles and off
> at the other side. Ideally, these would be electric.
>
> So, articulated truck pulls in, the road tractor unit disconnects and
> drives away to a holding/service area, while the waiting local shunting
> tractor couples up and takes the trailer on to the train. These would be
> driven by local shunting drivers (but ideally be self-driven) who would not
> go through the Tunnel. The process is reversed at the other side. The
> shunting drivers just work in one terminal.
>
> So, no drivers waste time going through the Tunnel, and the road tractors
> are released as soon as they drop off their trailers. They may then wait
> for then next for their next load in a holding/service area, or go straight
> across to the pick-up area if the next load is already waiting for them.
>

You'd still need some works to the terminal areas, as they're not remotely
set up for that kind of operation.

Looking at Folkestone on Google maps, I guess there could be space found
for tractor unit exchange somewhere before boarding (after check-in and
customs, presumably?); for arriving trailers you could maybe make an
exchange area somewhere near the fuel station? Or perhaps the nearby truck
stop around 5km away would be more convenient.

Anna Noyd-Dryver

On Sun, 3 Apr 2022 19:59:57 -0000 (UTC), Anna Noyd-Dryver
<anna@noyd-dryver.com> wrote:

>So that leaves three options:
>
>1) A captive fleet of tractor units which travel with the trailers aboard
>the train
>
>2) New or rebuilt train(s) which allow the tractor unit to uncouple and
>leave the train
>
>3) New wagons which can accommodate the trailer within a loading gauge
>suitable for travelling beyond the Eurotunnel network. These already exist
>for other flows in Europe, but presumably won't fit UK loading gauge other
>than HS1.
>
>For a 'proof of concept' trial, the first option seems most likely.

Agreed, and if the 'proof of concept works then the technical solution
for options 2/3 already exists.

<https://www.railweb.ch/en/finally-a-wagon-to-carry-standard-semi-trailers-throughout-europe/>

As far as I know these wagons have been operating for a number of
years unloading in Calais with the trailers for the UK transferring to
ferries. Similar wagons could be used for a truck driverless shuttle.
through the tunnel provided you could locate a concrete pad somewhere
on the UK side (and the Calais side can be accessed from the tunnel)

Nigel Emery <nigele3@ukonline.co.uk> wrote:
> On Sun, 3 Apr 2022 19:59:57 -0000 (UTC), Anna Noyd-Dryver
> <anna@noyd-dryver.com> wrote:
>
>> So that leaves three options:
>>
>> 1) A captive fleet of tractor units which travel with the trailers aboard
>> the train
>>
>> 2) New or rebuilt train(s) which allow the tractor unit to uncouple and
>> leave the train
>>
>> 3) New wagons which can accommodate the trailer within a loading gauge
>> suitable for travelling beyond the Eurotunnel network. These already exist
>> for other flows in Europe, but presumably won't fit UK loading gauge other
>> than HS1.
>>
>> For a 'proof of concept' trial, the first option seems most likely.
>
> Agreed, and if the 'proof of concept works then the technical solution
> for options 2/3 already exists.
>
> <https://www.railweb.ch/en/finally-a-wagon-to-carry-standard-semi-trailers-throughout-europe/>
>
> As far as I know these wagons have been operating for a number of
> years unloading in Calais with the trailers for the UK transferring to
> ferries. Similar wagons could be used for a truck driverless shuttle.
> through the tunnel provided you could locate a concrete pad somewhere
> on the UK side (and the Calais side can be accessed from the tunnel)
>
>

That I think shows the problem with all these proprietary methods,
incompatibility.
Modalohr have been running such services around Europe for a while and
their rail wagons are channel tunnel approved, ICBW but I thought they did
a demonstration run or two to near London
via HS1 some time ago.
What is a mystery is this firms project page which states that Dollands
Moor was to have a Modalohr
terminal but nothing appears to have proceeded.

<https://www.bwbconsulting.com/project/NTR2000R_dollands-moor-rail-freight-yard-and-modalohr-station-folkstone>

Despite the date in that I cannot find any photos of such a facility in
use there , and Google maps view may be too old.
Now we have another system with similarities in that it uses cradles but
slid sideways to load.
Mainland Europe may have enough traffic to enable competing systems and
separate terminals to exist but I doubt if the short distance such traffic
can penetrate the UK could support rival systems and at the moment it is
the competing Cargobeamer design that has partnered with Getlink/Eurotunnel
that was the source of this thread.

Tomorrow I’ll have a gander through Kent CC planning applications.

Such resources are often a good way to find out what a business intends
even though they may not want or have not provided much publicity about
something.

GH

In message <t2cq7k$447$1@dont-email.me>, at 18:49:24 on Sun, 3 Apr 2022,
Sam Wilson <ukr@dummy.wislons.fastmail.co.uk> remarked:
>Roland Perry <roland@perry.co.uk> wrote:
>> In message <5I4rUMH7zdSiFAkL@perry.uk>, at 18:44:27 on Sun, 3 Apr 2022,
>> Roland Perry <roland@perry.co.uk> remarked:
>>> In message <t2ciim$85l$1@dont-email.me>, at 16:38:46 on Sun, 3 Apr
>>> 2022, Sam Wilson <ukr@dummy.wislons.fastmail.co.uk> remarked:
>>>> Roland Perry <roland@perry.co.uk> wrote:
>>>>> In message <t2cdv5$a3l$1@dont-email.me>, at 15:20:05 on Sun, 3 Apr 2022,
>>>>> Recliner <recliner.usenet@gmail.com> remarked:
>>>>>> Roland Perry <roland@perry.co.uk> wrote:
>>>>>>> In message <w8idnbb-Nv0IAdT_nZ2dnUU7-d-dnZ2d@brightview.co.uk>, at
>>>>>>> 14:09:42 on Sun, 3 Apr 2022, Arthur Figgis <afiggis@example.invalid>
>>>>>>> remarked:
>>>>>>>>> Any such trains would have to be dedicated to unaccompanied trailers
>>>>>>>>> and new methods of loading / unloading would need to be invented
>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>> They would just use the methods which are quite happily being used on
>>>>>>>> the Continent.
>>>>>>>
>>>>>>> Would I be correct in thinking there aren't matching facilities in the
>>>>>>> UK, nor has anyone built and approved the new style of freight train for
>>>>>>> the tunnel?
>>>>>>
>>>>>> I'm not clear why different freight shuttle wagons would be needed?
>>>>>
>>>>> The loading/unloading facility in one of the earlier videos showed the
>>>>> containers being skated sideways onto open trucks.
>>>
>>> Trucks = railway wagons, if we prefer.
>>>
>>>> Err… I’ve lost the video but I think it was trailers rather than
>>>> containers
>>>> that were being skated sideways.
>>>
>>> Damn those invisible words!
>>>
>>> Yes, the containers were still on their trailers. I wonder if they also
>>> do curtain-sided trailers, tankers and so on?
>>
>> And the answer is "yes".
>>
>> https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=M7Xx7AC9Zaw
>
>I didn’t spot any standard containers in that video. I did see box
>trailers, including reefers, curtain sides and a container tank, so I guess
>standard containers and tank trailers might also be carried.

I was answering the "also do" question. Is there any particular reason
why it wouldn't also work with a container trailer, other than
intra-Europe they might be simpler transported by conventional container
train, therefore not tying up the trailer for the duration.
--
Roland Perry

In message <jau7olF7frtU1@mid.individual.net>, at 18:36:05 on Sun, 3 Apr
2022, Marland <gemehabal@btinternet.co.uk> remarked:
>Sam Wilson <ukr@dummy.wislons.fastmail.co.uk> wrote:
>> Roland Perry <roland@perry.co.uk> wrote:
>>> In message <t2cdv5$a3l$1@dont-email.me>, at 15:20:05 on Sun, 3 Apr 2022,
>>> Recliner <recliner.usenet@gmail.com> remarked:
>>>> Roland Perry <roland@perry.co.uk> wrote:
>>>>> In message <w8idnbb-Nv0IAdT_nZ2dnUU7-d-dnZ2d@brightview.co.uk>, at
>>>>> 14:09:42 on Sun, 3 Apr 2022, Arthur Figgis <afiggis@example.invalid>
>>>>> remarked:
>>>>>>> Any such trains would have to be dedicated to unaccompanied trailers
>>>>>>> and new methods of loading / unloading would need to be invented
>>>>>>
>>>>>> They would just use the methods which are quite happily being used on
>>>>>> the Continent.
>>>>>
>>>>> Would I be correct in thinking there aren't matching facilities in the
>>>>> UK, nor has anyone built and approved the new style of freight train for
>>>>> the tunnel?
>>>>
>>>> I'm not clear why different freight shuttle wagons would be needed?
>>>
>>> The loading/unloading facility in one of the earlier videos showed the
>>> containers being skated sideways onto open trucks.
>>
>> Err… I’ve lost the video but I think it was trailers rather than
>>containers that were being skated sideways.
>
>Was it the one I posted on the Cargobeamer system ?
>Shows how their system works at Calais and other terminals on the Continent
>works .
>
><https://youtu.be/3MkdqvXv2lw>

There are few very similar such videos.

>For Container substitute the word Cradle or maybe skid, the trailer is
>hauled onto one and the tractor unit or tug drives off . This is done on a
>dedicated platform area where such trailers on cradles are pre positioned
>adjacent to where a Cargobeamer railway wagon designed for the task will
>be when the train pulls in . The cradles and the trailers upon them are
>moved sideways onto the railway wagons by a mechanism that has been built
>into the platform area. Off loading is a reversal of the process.
>
>What both Cargobeamer and their partner Getlink (nee Eurotunnel) are
>being coy about and havn’t given details of is how the operation through
>the tunnel is going to work as so far they have not built such a loading
>/unloading area .

>So far it appears they intend to unload trailers from the Cargobeamer
>trains at Calais connect a normal tractor unit to them and drive them
>onto the Eurotunnel shuttle which travels to Folkestone tunnel
>terminal, from there they are taken onto a facility at Ashford as
>Folkestone doesn’t have enough room to park up unaccompanied trailers.

OK, so they need a pool of these in-house normal tractors.

>That they have to travel from the tunnel terminal at Folkestone to Ashford
>along public highways means that use of dock style trailer shunter tugs may
>not be ideal so if they have brought in a fleet
>of normal lorry tractors then the loading onto the shuttle will be as it is
>for other traffic and the whole travels through the tunnel like any other
>artic with drivers brought it in for the task.

With the drivers spending most of their day sitting on the shuttle
trains bored out of their minds, or two sets of drivers, one each end?

>Presumably if the service attracts enough custom then somewhere a dedicated
>Cargobeamer area will be built and their own rail wagons moved through the
>Tunnel.
>
>What this service is not doing and is not trying to do is is provide an
>unaccompanied trailer service just through the tunnel,

It does sound like they are unaccompanied by the driver who will take
them to their final UK destination.

> it is an add on to long unaccompanied trailer movements across europe
>where for the time being the UK segment is done by road in the normal
>manner on the existing shuttles.

--
Roland Perry

In message <tYwuQmRZNoSiFA3P@perry.uk>, at 06:34:17 on Mon, 4 Apr 2022,
Roland Perry <roland@perry.co.uk> remarked:
>In message <jau7olF7frtU1@mid.individual.net>, at 18:36:05 on Sun, 3
>Apr 2022, Marland <gemehabal@btinternet.co.uk> remarked:
>>Sam Wilson <ukr@dummy.wislons.fastmail.co.uk> wrote:
>>> Roland Perry <roland@perry.co.uk> wrote:
>>>> In message <t2cdv5$a3l$1@dont-email.me>, at 15:20:05 on Sun, 3 Apr 2022,
>>>> Recliner <recliner.usenet@gmail.com> remarked:
>>>>> Roland Perry <roland@perry.co.uk> wrote:
>>>>>> In message <w8idnbb-Nv0IAdT_nZ2dnUU7-d-dnZ2d@brightview.co.uk>, at
>>>>>> 14:09:42 on Sun, 3 Apr 2022, Arthur Figgis <afiggis@example.invalid>
>>>>>> remarked:
>>>>>>>> Any such trains would have to be dedicated to unaccompanied trailers
>>>>>>>> and new methods of loading / unloading would need to be invented
>>>>>>>
>>>>>>> They would just use the methods which are quite happily being used on
>>>>>>> the Continent.
>>>>>>
>>>>>> Would I be correct in thinking there aren't matching facilities in the
>>>>>> UK, nor has anyone built and approved the new style of freight train for
>>>>>> the tunnel?
>>>>>
>>>>> I'm not clear why different freight shuttle wagons would be needed?
>>>>
>>>> The loading/unloading facility in one of the earlier videos showed the
>>>> containers being skated sideways onto open trucks.
>>>
>>> Err… I’ve lost the video but I think it was trailers rather than
>>>containers that were being skated sideways.
>>
>>Was it the one I posted on the Cargobeamer system ?
>>Shows how their system works at Calais and other terminals on the Continent
>>works .
>>
>><https://youtu.be/3MkdqvXv2lw>
>
>There are

<cough> a

>few very similar such videos.
>
>>For Container substitute the word Cradle or maybe skid, the trailer is
>>hauled onto one and the tractor unit or tug drives off . This is done on a
>>dedicated platform area where such trailers on cradles are pre positioned
>>adjacent to where a Cargobeamer railway wagon designed for the task will
>>be when the train pulls in . The cradles and the trailers upon them are
>>moved sideways onto the railway wagons by a mechanism that has been built
>>into the platform area. Off loading is a reversal of the process.
>>
>>What both Cargobeamer and their partner Getlink (nee Eurotunnel) are
>>being coy about and havn’t given details of is how the operation through
>>the tunnel is going to work as so far they have not built such a loading
>>/unloading area .
>
>>So far it appears they intend to unload trailers from the Cargobeamer
>>trains at Calais connect a normal tractor unit to them and drive them
>>onto the Eurotunnel shuttle which travels to Folkestone tunnel
>>terminal, from there they are taken onto a facility at Ashford as
>>Folkestone doesn’t have enough room to park up unaccompanied trailers.
>
>OK, so they need a pool of these in-house normal tractors.
>
>>That they have to travel from the tunnel terminal at Folkestone to Ashford
>>along public highways means that use of dock style trailer shunter tugs may
>>not be ideal so if they have brought in a fleet
>>of normal lorry tractors then the loading onto the shuttle will be as it is
>>for other traffic and the whole travels through the tunnel like any other
>>artic with drivers brought it in for the task.
>
>With the drivers spending most of their day sitting on the shuttle
>trains bored out of their minds, or two sets of drivers, one each end?
>
>>Presumably if the service attracts enough custom then somewhere a dedicated
>>Cargobeamer area will be built and their own rail wagons moved through the
>>Tunnel.
>>
>>What this service is not doing and is not trying to do is is provide an
>>unaccompanied trailer service just through the tunnel,
>
>It does sound like they are unaccompanied by the driver who will take
>them to their final UK destination.
>
>> it is an add on to long unaccompanied trailer movements across europe
>>where for the time being the UK segment is done by road in the normal
>>manner on the existing shuttles.
>

--
Roland Perry

Roland Perry <roland@perry.co.uk> wrote:
> In message <t2cq7k$447$1@dont-email.me>, at 18:49:24 on Sun, 3 Apr 2022,
> Sam Wilson <ukr@dummy.wislons.fastmail.co.uk> remarked:
>> Roland Perry <roland@perry.co.uk> wrote:
>>> In message <5I4rUMH7zdSiFAkL@perry.uk>, at 18:44:27 on Sun, 3 Apr 2022,
>>> Roland Perry <roland@perry.co.uk> remarked:
>>>> In message <t2ciim$85l$1@dont-email.me>, at 16:38:46 on Sun, 3 Apr
>>>> 2022, Sam Wilson <ukr@dummy.wislons.fastmail.co.uk> remarked:
>>>>> Roland Perry <roland@perry.co.uk> wrote:
>>>>>> In message <t2cdv5$a3l$1@dont-email.me>, at 15:20:05 on Sun, 3 Apr 2022,
>>>>>> Recliner <recliner.usenet@gmail.com> remarked:
>>>>>>> Roland Perry <roland@perry.co.uk> wrote:
>>>>>>>> In message <w8idnbb-Nv0IAdT_nZ2dnUU7-d-dnZ2d@brightview.co.uk>, at
>>>>>>>> 14:09:42 on Sun, 3 Apr 2022, Arthur Figgis <afiggis@example.invalid>
>>>>>>>> remarked:
>>>>>>>>>> Any such trains would have to be dedicated to unaccompanied trailers
>>>>>>>>>> and new methods of loading / unloading would need to be invented
>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>> They would just use the methods which are quite happily being used on
>>>>>>>>> the Continent.
>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>> Would I be correct in thinking there aren't matching facilities in the
>>>>>>>> UK, nor has anyone built and approved the new style of freight train for
>>>>>>>> the tunnel?
>>>>>>>
>>>>>>> I'm not clear why different freight shuttle wagons would be needed?
>>>>>>
>>>>>> The loading/unloading facility in one of the earlier videos showed the
>>>>>> containers being skated sideways onto open trucks.
>>>>
>>>> Trucks = railway wagons, if we prefer.
>>>>
>>>>> Err… I’ve lost the video but I think it was trailers rather than
>>>>> containers
>>>>> that were being skated sideways.
>>>>
>>>> Damn those invisible words!
>>>>
>>>> Yes, the containers were still on their trailers. I wonder if they also
>>>> do curtain-sided trailers, tankers and so on?
>>>
>>> And the answer is "yes".
>>>
>>> https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=M7Xx7AC9Zaw
>>
>> I didn’t spot any standard containers in that video. I did see box
>> trailers, including reefers, curtain sides and a container tank, so I guess
>> standard containers and tank trailers might also be carried.
>
> I was answering the "also do" question. Is there any particular reason
> why it wouldn't also work with a container trailer, other than
> intra-Europe they might be simpler transported by conventional container
> train, therefore not tying up the trailer for the duration.

Is that a question? :-)

Sam

--
The entity formerly known as Sam.Wilson@ed.ac.uk
Spit the dummy to reply

On 04/04/2022 01:33, Marland wrote:
> Nigel Emery <nigele3@ukonline.co.uk> wrote:
>> On Sun, 3 Apr 2022 19:59:57 -0000 (UTC), Anna Noyd-Dryver
>> <anna@noyd-dryver.com> wrote:
>>
>>> So that leaves three options:
>>>
>>> 1) A captive fleet of tractor units which travel with the trailers aboard
>>> the train
>>>
>>> 2) New or rebuilt train(s) which allow the tractor unit to uncouple and
>>> leave the train
>>>
>>> 3) New wagons which can accommodate the trailer within a loading gauge
>>> suitable for travelling beyond the Eurotunnel network. These already exist
>>> for other flows in Europe, but presumably won't fit UK loading gauge other
>>> than HS1.
>>>
>>> For a 'proof of concept' trial, the first option seems most likely.
>>
>> Agreed, and if the 'proof of concept works then the technical solution
>> for options 2/3 already exists.
>>
>> <https://www.railweb.ch/en/finally-a-wagon-to-carry-standard-semi-trailers-throughout-europe/>
>>
>> As far as I know these wagons have been operating for a number of
>> years unloading in Calais with the trailers for the UK transferring to
>> ferries. Similar wagons could be used for a truck driverless shuttle.
>> through the tunnel provided you could locate a concrete pad somewhere
>> on the UK side (and the Calais side can be accessed from the tunnel)
>>
>>
>
> That I think shows the problem with all these proprietary methods,
> incompatibility.
> Modalohr have been running such services around Europe for a while and
> their rail wagons are channel tunnel approved, ICBW but I thought they did
> a demonstration run or two to near London
> via HS1 some time ago.
> What is a mystery is this firms project page which states that Dollands
> Moor was to have a Modalohr
> terminal but nothing appears to have proceeded.
>
> <https://www.bwbconsulting.com/project/NTR2000R_dollands-moor-rail-freight-yard-and-modalohr-station-folkstone>
>
> Despite the date in that I cannot find any photos of such a facility in
> use there , and Google maps view may be too old.
> Now we have another system with similarities in that it uses cradles but
> slid sideways to load.
> Mainland Europe may have enough traffic to enable competing systems and
> separate terminals to exist but I doubt if the short distance such traffic
> can penetrate the UK could support rival systems and at the moment it is
> the competing Cargobeamer design that has partnered with Getlink/Eurotunnel
> that was the source of this thread.
>
> Tomorrow I’ll have a gander through Kent CC planning applications.
That's often an excellent way to learn of "secret" plans although there
are ways for third parties to make the application to hide the true
applicant.

Patent applications, Trade Marks, and company registrations also useful
intelligence.
>
> Such resources are often a good way to find out what a business intends
> even though they may not want or have not provided much publicity about
> something.
>
>
> GH

On Sun, 3 Apr 2022 19:59:57 -0000 (UTC), Anna Noyd-Dryver <anna@noyd-dryver.com> wrote:

>Recliner <recliner.usenet@gmail.com> wrote:
>> ColinR <rail@greystane.shetland.co.uk> wrote:
>>> On 03/04/2022 16:20, Recliner wrote:
>>>> Roland Perry <roland@perry.co.uk> wrote:
>>>>> In message <w8idnbb-Nv0IAdT_nZ2dnUU7-d-dnZ2d@brightview.co.uk>, at
>>>>> 14:09:42 on Sun, 3 Apr 2022, Arthur Figgis <afiggis@example.invalid>
>>>>> remarked:
>>>>>>> Any such trains would have to be dedicated to unaccompanied trailers
>>>>>>> and new methods of loading / unloading would need to be invented
>>>>>>
>>>>>> They would just use the methods which are quite happily being used on
>>>>>> the Continent.
>>>>>
>>>>> Would I be correct in thinking there aren't matching facilities in the
>>>>> UK, nor has anyone built and approved the new style of freight train for
>>>>> the tunnel?
>>>>
>>>> I'm not clear why different freight shuttle wagons would be needed?
>>>>
>>>
>>> Normal freight shuttle, drive in, park, next artic follows, parks, next
>>> artic follows, park etc.
>>>
>>> With unaccompanied trailers they need to be backed on (full length of
>>> train to start, reducing as the train fills), dropped, tractor unit then
>>> needs to drive back up the full length of train before next trailer can
>>> be backed down etc.
>>>
>>> Very different process so current shuttle trains not practicable as the
>>> dropping process is very time consuming. Better to be done elsewhere
>>> where more space is available.
>>>
>>
>> Why such unnecessary complexity? Just use temporary, small shunting
>> tractor units to haul the trailers on to standard freight shuttles and off
>> at the other side. Ideally, these would be electric.
>>
>> So, articulated truck pulls in, the road tractor unit disconnects and
>> drives away to a holding/service area, while the waiting local shunting
>> tractor couples up and takes the trailer on to the train. These would be
>> driven by local shunting drivers (but ideally be self-driven) who would not
>> go through the Tunnel. The process is reversed at the other side. The
>> shunting drivers just work in one terminal.
>>
>> So, no drivers waste time going through the Tunnel, and the road tractors
>> are released as soon as they drop off their trailers. They may then wait
>> for then next for their next load in a holding/service area, or go straight
>> across to the pick-up area if the next load is already waiting for them.
>>
>
>You'd still need some works to the terminal areas, as they're not remotely
>set up for that kind of operation.
>
>Looking at Folkestone on Google maps, I guess there could be space found
>for tractor unit exchange somewhere before boarding (after check-in and
>customs, presumably?); for arriving trailers you could maybe make an
>exchange area somewhere near the fuel station? Or perhaps the nearby truck
>stop around 5km away would be more convenient.

I think it would be highly desirable for the tractor swaps to happen within the terminal area. That way, the small
shunting tractors won't need to be capable of hauling trailers on the public highway.

In message <kskl4h9fhad2nn3brdhvka2sd7m8t0cnsg@4ax.com>, at 12:18:03 on
Mon, 4 Apr 2022, Recliner <recliner.usenet@gmail.com> remarked:
>On Sun, 3 Apr 2022 19:59:57 -0000 (UTC), Anna Noyd-Dryver
><anna@noyd-dryver.com> wrote:
>
>>Recliner <recliner.usenet@gmail.com> wrote:
>>> ColinR <rail@greystane.shetland.co.uk> wrote:
>>>> On 03/04/2022 16:20, Recliner wrote:
>>>>> Roland Perry <roland@perry.co.uk> wrote:
>>>>>> In message <w8idnbb-Nv0IAdT_nZ2dnUU7-d-dnZ2d@brightview.co.uk>, at
>>>>>> 14:09:42 on Sun, 3 Apr 2022, Arthur Figgis <afiggis@example.invalid>
>>>>>> remarked:
>>>>>>>> Any such trains would have to be dedicated to unaccompanied trailers
>>>>>>>> and new methods of loading / unloading would need to be invented
>>>>>>>
>>>>>>> They would just use the methods which are quite happily being used on
>>>>>>> the Continent.
>>>>>>
>>>>>> Would I be correct in thinking there aren't matching facilities in the
>>>>>> UK, nor has anyone built and approved the new style of freight train for
>>>>>> the tunnel?
>>>>>
>>>>> I'm not clear why different freight shuttle wagons would be needed?
>>>>>
>>>>
>>>> Normal freight shuttle, drive in, park, next artic follows, parks, next
>>>> artic follows, park etc.
>>>>
>>>> With unaccompanied trailers they need to be backed on (full length of
>>>> train to start, reducing as the train fills), dropped, tractor unit then
>>>> needs to drive back up the full length of train before next trailer can
>>>> be backed down etc.
>>>>
>>>> Very different process so current shuttle trains not practicable as the
>>>> dropping process is very time consuming. Better to be done elsewhere
>>>> where more space is available.
>>>>
>>>
>>> Why such unnecessary complexity? Just use temporary, small shunting
>>> tractor units to haul the trailers on to standard freight shuttles and off
>>> at the other side. Ideally, these would be electric.
>>>
>>> So, articulated truck pulls in, the road tractor unit disconnects and
>>> drives away to a holding/service area, while the waiting local shunting
>>> tractor couples up and takes the trailer on to the train. These would be
>>> driven by local shunting drivers (but ideally be self-driven) who would not
>>> go through the Tunnel. The process is reversed at the other side. The
>>> shunting drivers just work in one terminal.
>>>
>>> So, no drivers waste time going through the Tunnel, and the road tractors
>>> are released as soon as they drop off their trailers. They may then wait
>>> for then next for their next load in a holding/service area, or go straight
>>> across to the pick-up area if the next load is already waiting for them.
>>>
>>
>>You'd still need some works to the terminal areas, as they're not remotely
>>set up for that kind of operation.
>>
>>Looking at Folkestone on Google maps, I guess there could be space found
>>for tractor unit exchange somewhere before boarding (after check-in and
>>customs, presumably?); for arriving trailers you could maybe make an
>>exchange area somewhere near the fuel station? Or perhaps the nearby truck
>>stop around 5km away would be more convenient.
>
>I think it would be highly desirable for the tractor swaps to happen
>within the terminal area. That way, the small
>shunting tractors won't need to be capable of hauling trailers on the
>public highway.

It's been said that the temporary tractors would have to be full size
ones because there's no spare space at Folkestone.
--
Roland Perry

Roland Perry <roland@perry.co.uk> wrote:
> In message <kskl4h9fhad2nn3brdhvka2sd7m8t0cnsg@4ax.com>, at 12:18:03 on
> Mon, 4 Apr 2022, Recliner <recliner.usenet@gmail.com> remarked:
>> On Sun, 3 Apr 2022 19:59:57 -0000 (UTC), Anna Noyd-Dryver
>> <anna@noyd-dryver.com> wrote:
>>
>>> Recliner <recliner.usenet@gmail.com> wrote:
>>>> ColinR <rail@greystane.shetland.co.uk> wrote:
>>>>> On 03/04/2022 16:20, Recliner wrote:
>>>>>> Roland Perry <roland@perry.co.uk> wrote:
>>>>>>> In message <w8idnbb-Nv0IAdT_nZ2dnUU7-d-dnZ2d@brightview.co.uk>, at
>>>>>>> 14:09:42 on Sun, 3 Apr 2022, Arthur Figgis <afiggis@example.invalid>
>>>>>>> remarked:
>>>>>>>>> Any such trains would have to be dedicated to unaccompanied trailers
>>>>>>>>> and new methods of loading / unloading would need to be invented
>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>> They would just use the methods which are quite happily being used on
>>>>>>>> the Continent.
>>>>>>>
>>>>>>> Would I be correct in thinking there aren't matching facilities in the
>>>>>>> UK, nor has anyone built and approved the new style of freight train for
>>>>>>> the tunnel?
>>>>>>
>>>>>> I'm not clear why different freight shuttle wagons would be needed?
>>>>>>
>>>>>
>>>>> Normal freight shuttle, drive in, park, next artic follows, parks, next
>>>>> artic follows, park etc.
>>>>>
>>>>> With unaccompanied trailers they need to be backed on (full length of
>>>>> train to start, reducing as the train fills), dropped, tractor unit then
>>>>> needs to drive back up the full length of train before next trailer can
>>>>> be backed down etc.
>>>>>
>>>>> Very different process so current shuttle trains not practicable as the
>>>>> dropping process is very time consuming. Better to be done elsewhere
>>>>> where more space is available.
>>>>>
>>>>
>>>> Why such unnecessary complexity? Just use temporary, small shunting
>>>> tractor units to haul the trailers on to standard freight shuttles and off
>>>> at the other side. Ideally, these would be electric.
>>>>
>>>> So, articulated truck pulls in, the road tractor unit disconnects and
>>>> drives away to a holding/service area, while the waiting local shunting
>>>> tractor couples up and takes the trailer on to the train. These would be
>>>> driven by local shunting drivers (but ideally be self-driven) who would not
>>>> go through the Tunnel. The process is reversed at the other side. The
>>>> shunting drivers just work in one terminal.
>>>>
>>>> So, no drivers waste time going through the Tunnel, and the road tractors
>>>> are released as soon as they drop off their trailers. They may then wait
>>>> for then next for their next load in a holding/service area, or go straight
>>>> across to the pick-up area if the next load is already waiting for them.
>>>>
>>>
>>> You'd still need some works to the terminal areas, as they're not remotely
>>> set up for that kind of operation.
>>>
>>> Looking at Folkestone on Google maps, I guess there could be space found
>>> for tractor unit exchange somewhere before boarding (after check-in and
>>> customs, presumably?); for arriving trailers you could maybe make an
>>> exchange area somewhere near the fuel station? Or perhaps the nearby truck
>>> stop around 5km away would be more convenient.
>>
>> I think it would be highly desirable for the tractor swaps to happen
>> within the terminal area. That way, the small
>> shunting tractors won't need to be capable of hauling trailers on the
>> public highway.
>
> It's been said that the temporary tractors would have to be full size
> ones because there's no spare space at Folkestone.

Perhaps the terminal would need to exand on to the next-door field?

On 27/03/2022 08:52, Tweed wrote:
> According to this morning’s Sunday Times Grant Shapps is going to ban P&O
> for UK ports unless they pay minimum wage. Something I believe I suggested
> here.
>
> P&O apparently welcomes this as a level playing field, so presumably this
> will apply to all ferry firms.
>
> Can’t get a link at the moment as the “classic” Times app is not giving
> links (often has technical difficulties with links) and the article isn’t
> appearing in the web version for some reason.
>

A classic case of a politician shooting himself and the rest of the
country in the foot.

P&O operates on the England to Northern Ireland routes and this move is
already causing disruption and shortages to the extent that the Stena
Line ferry from Fishguard has been drafted in to cover shortfall.

In message <t2f1mv$5p9$1@dont-email.me>, at 15:09:19 on Mon, 4 Apr 2022,
Recliner <recliner.usenet@gmail.com> remarked:
>Roland Perry <roland@perry.co.uk> wrote:
>> In message <kskl4h9fhad2nn3brdhvka2sd7m8t0cnsg@4ax.com>, at 12:18:03 on
>> Mon, 4 Apr 2022, Recliner <recliner.usenet@gmail.com> remarked:
>>> On Sun, 3 Apr 2022 19:59:57 -0000 (UTC), Anna Noyd-Dryver
>>> <anna@noyd-dryver.com> wrote:
>>>
>>>> Recliner <recliner.usenet@gmail.com> wrote:
>>>>> ColinR <rail@greystane.shetland.co.uk> wrote:
>>>>>> On 03/04/2022 16:20, Recliner wrote:
>>>>>>> Roland Perry <roland@perry.co.uk> wrote:
>>>>>>>> In message <w8idnbb-Nv0IAdT_nZ2dnUU7-d-dnZ2d@brightview.co.uk>, at
>>>>>>>> 14:09:42 on Sun, 3 Apr 2022, Arthur Figgis <afiggis@example.invalid>
>>>>>>>> remarked:
>>>>>>>>>> Any such trains would have to be dedicated to unaccompanied trailers
>>>>>>>>>> and new methods of loading / unloading would need to be invented
>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>> They would just use the methods which are quite happily being used on
>>>>>>>>> the Continent.
>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>> Would I be correct in thinking there aren't matching facilities in the
>>>>>>>> UK, nor has anyone built and approved the new style of freight
>>>>>>>>train for
>>>>>>>> the tunnel?
>>>>>>>
>>>>>>> I'm not clear why different freight shuttle wagons would be needed?
>>>>>>>
>>>>>>
>>>>>> Normal freight shuttle, drive in, park, next artic follows, parks, next
>>>>>> artic follows, park etc.
>>>>>>
>>>>>> With unaccompanied trailers they need to be backed on (full length of
>>>>>> train to start, reducing as the train fills), dropped, tractor unit then
>>>>>> needs to drive back up the full length of train before next trailer can
>>>>>> be backed down etc.
>>>>>>
>>>>>> Very different process so current shuttle trains not practicable as the
>>>>>> dropping process is very time consuming. Better to be done elsewhere
>>>>>> where more space is available.
>>>>>>
>>>>>
>>>>> Why such unnecessary complexity? Just use temporary, small shunting
>>>>> tractor units to haul the trailers on to standard freight shuttles and off
>>>>> at the other side. Ideally, these would be electric.
>>>>>
>>>>> So, articulated truck pulls in, the road tractor unit disconnects and
>>>>> drives away to a holding/service area, while the waiting local shunting
>>>>> tractor couples up and takes the trailer on to the train. These would be
>>>>> driven by local shunting drivers (but ideally be self-driven) who
>>>>>would not
>>>>> go through the Tunnel. The process is reversed at the other side. The
>>>>> shunting drivers just work in one terminal.
>>>>>
>>>>> So, no drivers waste time going through the Tunnel, and the road tractors
>>>>> are released as soon as they drop off their trailers. They may then wait
>>>>> for then next for their next load in a holding/service area, or go
>>>>>straight
>>>>> across to the pick-up area if the next load is already waiting for them.
>>>>>
>>>>
>>>> You'd still need some works to the terminal areas, as they're not remotely
>>>> set up for that kind of operation.
>>>>
>>>> Looking at Folkestone on Google maps, I guess there could be space found
>>>> for tractor unit exchange somewhere before boarding (after check-in and
>>>> customs, presumably?); for arriving trailers you could maybe make an
>>>> exchange area somewhere near the fuel station? Or perhaps the nearby truck
>>>> stop around 5km away would be more convenient.
>>>
>>> I think it would be highly desirable for the tractor swaps to happen
>>> within the terminal area. That way, the small
>>> shunting tractors won't need to be capable of hauling trailers on the
>>> public highway.
>>
>> It's been said that the temporary tractors would have to be full size
>> ones because there's no spare space at Folkestone.
>
>Perhaps the terminal would need to exand on to the next-door field?

That's getting to be a pretty big project.
--
Roland Perry

On 03/04/2022 16:06, Roland Perry wrote:
> In message <w8idnbb-Nv0IAdT_nZ2dnUU7-d-dnZ2d@brightview.co.uk>, at
> 14:09:42 on Sun, 3 Apr 2022, Arthur Figgis <afiggis@example.invalid>
> remarked:
>>> Any such trains would have to be dedicated to unaccompanied trailers
>>> and  new methods of loading / unloading would need to be invented
>>
>> They would just use the methods which are quite happily being used on
>> the Continent.
>
> Would I be correct in thinking there aren't matching facilities in the
> UK,

There weren't any in France, Italy or Germany either...

nor has anyone built and approved the new style of freight train for
> the tunnel?

Given the rail network isn't still using chaldron wagons, the
introduction of new rolling stock can't be an totally insurmountable
problem.

--
Arthur Figgis

In message <5Lqdnfh7rpHBttb_nZ2dnUU7-TPNnZ2d@brightview.co.uk>, at
18:31:06 on Mon, 4 Apr 2022, Arthur Figgis <afiggis@example.invalid>
remarked:
>On 03/04/2022 16:06, Roland Perry wrote:
>> In message <w8idnbb-Nv0IAdT_nZ2dnUU7-d-dnZ2d@brightview.co.uk>, at
>>14:09:42 on Sun, 3 Apr 2022, Arthur Figgis <afiggis@example.invalid>
>>remarked:

>>>> Any such trains would have to be dedicated to unaccompanied
>>>>trailers and  new methods of loading / unloading would need to be
>>>>invented
>>>
>>> They would just use the methods which are quite happily being used
>>>on the Continent.

>> Would I be correct in thinking there aren't matching facilities in
>>the UK,
>
>There weren't any in France, Italy or Germany either...

I expect the Continental ones have economises of scale. Whereas the UK
is bit out on limb.

Would I be right in thinking for example that the Calais depot would be
handling ferry traffic too (and intra-EU Calais area to r27), whereas
one at Ashford only tunnel traffic?

>>nor has anyone built and approved the new style of freight train for
>>the tunnel?
>
>Given the rail network isn't still using chaldron wagons, the
>introduction of new rolling stock can't be an totally insurmountable
>problem.

Few things are insurmountable, if you throw enough money at them (apart
from Nuclear Fission and fulfilling Boris's promise of no customs checks
across the Irish Sea).

The Chunnel have always been very fussy about what they'll let through.
--
Roland Perry

Roland Perry <roland@perry.co.uk> wrote:
> In message <5Lqdnfh7rpHBttb_nZ2dnUU7-TPNnZ2d@brightview.co.uk>, at
> 18:31:06 on Mon, 4 Apr 2022, Arthur Figgis <afiggis@example.invalid>
> remarked:
>> On 03/04/2022 16:06, Roland Perry wrote:
>>> In message <w8idnbb-Nv0IAdT_nZ2dnUU7-d-dnZ2d@brightview.co.uk>, at
>>> 14:09:42 on Sun, 3 Apr 2022, Arthur Figgis <afiggis@example.invalid>
>>> remarked:
>
>>>>> Any such trains would have to be dedicated to unaccompanied
>>>>> trailers and  new methods of loading / unloading would need to be
>>>>> invented
>>>>
>>>> They would just use the methods which are quite happily being used
>>>> on the Continent.
>
>>> Would I be correct in thinking there aren't matching facilities in
>>> the UK,
>>
>> There weren't any in France, Italy or Germany either...
>
> I expect the Continental ones have economises of scale. Whereas the UK
> is bit out on limb.
>
> Would I be right in thinking for example that the Calais depot would be
> handling ferry traffic too (and intra-EU Calais area to r27), whereas
> one at Ashford only tunnel traffic?
>
>>> nor has anyone built and approved the new style of freight train for
>>> the tunnel?
>>
>> Given the rail network isn't still using chaldron wagons, the
>> introduction of new rolling stock can't be an totally insurmountable
>> problem.
>
> Few things are insurmountable, if you throw enough money at them (apart
> from Nuclear Fission and fulfilling Boris's promise of no customs checks
> across the Irish Sea).

I think you meant “nuclear fusion”, nuclear fission has been used
successfully since Calder Hall power station opened in 1956.

--
Jeremy Double

Am 05.04.2022 um 07:59 schrieb Roland Perry:
> In message <5Lqdnfh7rpHBttb_nZ2dnUU7-TPNnZ2d@brightview.co.uk>, at
> 18:31:06 on Mon, 4 Apr 2022, Arthur Figgis <afiggis@example.invalid>
> remarked:
>> On 03/04/2022 16:06, Roland Perry wrote:

>>>  Would I be correct in thinking there aren't matching facilities in
>>> the  UK,
>>
>> There weren't any in France, Italy or Germany either...
>
> I expect the Continental ones have economises of scale. Whereas the UK
> is bit out on limb.
>
> Would I be right in thinking for example that the Calais depot would be
> handling ferry traffic too (and intra-EU Calais area to r27), whereas
> one at Ashford only tunnel traffic?

I linked a CargoBeamer PDF a few days ago offering transfer from Calais
to UK via Chunnel or three different ferries. The basic network is
Germany, France (Calais, Perpignan), Italy.

Rolf

In message
<1745932197.670837260.319988.jmd.nospam-btinternet.com@news.individual.ne
t>, at 07:43:00 on Tue, 5 Apr 2022, Jeremy Double
<jmd.nospam@btinternet.com> remarked:
>Roland Perry <roland@perry.co.uk> wrote:
>> In message <5Lqdnfh7rpHBttb_nZ2dnUU7-TPNnZ2d@brightview.co.uk>, at
>> 18:31:06 on Mon, 4 Apr 2022, Arthur Figgis <afiggis@example.invalid>
>> remarked:
>>> On 03/04/2022 16:06, Roland Perry wrote:
>>>> In message <w8idnbb-Nv0IAdT_nZ2dnUU7-d-dnZ2d@brightview.co.uk>, at
>>>> 14:09:42 on Sun, 3 Apr 2022, Arthur Figgis <afiggis@example.invalid>
>>>> remarked:
>>
>>>>>> Any such trains would have to be dedicated to unaccompanied
>>>>>> trailers and  new methods of loading / unloading would need to be
>>>>>> invented
>>>>>
>>>>> They would just use the methods which are quite happily being used
>>>>> on the Continent.
>>
>>>> Would I be correct in thinking there aren't matching facilities in
>>>> the UK,
>>>
>>> There weren't any in France, Italy or Germany either...
>>
>> I expect the Continental ones have economises of scale. Whereas the UK
>> is bit out on limb.
>>
>> Would I be right in thinking for example that the Calais depot would be
>> handling ferry traffic too (and intra-EU Calais area to r27), whereas
>> one at Ashford only tunnel traffic?
>>
>>>> nor has anyone built and approved the new style of freight train for
>>>> the tunnel?
>>>
>>> Given the rail network isn't still using chaldron wagons, the
>>> introduction of new rolling stock can't be an totally insurmountable
>>> problem.
>>
>> Few things are insurmountable, if you throw enough money at them (apart
>> from Nuclear Fission and fulfilling Boris's promise of no customs checks
>> across the Irish Sea).
>
>I think you meant “nuclear fusion”,

Obviously. Finger fart.

>nuclear fission has been used successfully since Calder Hall power
>station opened in 1956.

--
Roland Perry

In message <t2gs6i$p21$1@dont-email.me>, at 09:47:29 on Tue, 5 Apr 2022,
Rolf Mantel <news@hartig-mantel.de> remarked:
>Am 05.04.2022 um 07:59 schrieb Roland Perry:
>> In message <5Lqdnfh7rpHBttb_nZ2dnUU7-TPNnZ2d@brightview.co.uk>, at
>>18:31:06 on Mon, 4 Apr 2022, Arthur Figgis <afiggis@example.invalid>
>>remarked:
>>> On 03/04/2022 16:06, Roland Perry wrote:
>
>>>>  Would I be correct in thinking there aren't matching facilities in
>>>>the  UK,
>>>
>>> There weren't any in France, Italy or Germany either...

>> I expect the Continental ones have economises of scale. Whereas the
>>UK is bit out on limb.

>> Would I be right in thinking for example that the Calais depot would
>>be handling ferry traffic too (and intra-EU Calais area to r27),
>>whereas one at Ashford only tunnel traffic?
>
>I linked a CargoBeamer PDF a few days ago offering transfer from Calais
>to UK via Chunnel

Shunting to Ashford via Eurotunnel.
Trailers available in Ashford; pick-up by end customer within 24hrs

Not clear if that means "you must pick it up within 24hrs", or "the most
you'll have to wait before it's ready for pickup is 24hrs".

What we do know is their drop-off/pick-up point is in central Ashford,
not at the Chunnel terminal.

> or three different ferries.

Transit time 3-9hrs, and obviously they won't be putting them on any
kind of rail carriage for that leg.

>The basic network is Germany, France (Calais, Perpignan), Italy.

The html says:

Ashford/Calais - Perpignan
Ashford/Calais - Domodossola

And not Ashford-Calais, and since then we've got no closer to
understanding exactly how they get the trailers through the tunnel.

Although their timetable above appears to allow 4hrs for the journey.

I think the only thing all perhaps agree on is that they don't have one
of their cute cradle-loaders at Ashford. (And hence probably aren't
running their special flat-bed trains through the tunnel).
--
Roland Perry

On Mon, 4 Apr 2022 16:57:12 +0100, Roland Perry <roland@perry.co.uk> wrote:

>In message <t2f1mv$5p9$1@dont-email.me>, at 15:09:19 on Mon, 4 Apr 2022,
>Recliner <recliner.usenet@gmail.com> remarked:
>>Roland Perry <roland@perry.co.uk> wrote:
>>> In message <kskl4h9fhad2nn3brdhvka2sd7m8t0cnsg@4ax.com>, at 12:18:03 on
>>> Mon, 4 Apr 2022, Recliner <recliner.usenet@gmail.com> remarked:
>>>> On Sun, 3 Apr 2022 19:59:57 -0000 (UTC), Anna Noyd-Dryver
>>>> <anna@noyd-dryver.com> wrote:
>>>>
>>>>> Recliner <recliner.usenet@gmail.com> wrote:
>>>>>> ColinR <rail@greystane.shetland.co.uk> wrote:
>>>>>>> On 03/04/2022 16:20, Recliner wrote:
>>>>>>>> Roland Perry <roland@perry.co.uk> wrote:
>>>>>>>>> In message <w8idnbb-Nv0IAdT_nZ2dnUU7-d-dnZ2d@brightview.co.uk>, at
>>>>>>>>> 14:09:42 on Sun, 3 Apr 2022, Arthur Figgis <afiggis@example.invalid>
>>>>>>>>> remarked:
>>>>>>>>>>> Any such trains would have to be dedicated to unaccompanied trailers
>>>>>>>>>>> and new methods of loading / unloading would need to be invented
>>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>> They would just use the methods which are quite happily being used on
>>>>>>>>>> the Continent.
>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>> Would I be correct in thinking there aren't matching facilities in the
>>>>>>>>> UK, nor has anyone built and approved the new style of freight
>>>>>>>>>train for
>>>>>>>>> the tunnel?
>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>> I'm not clear why different freight shuttle wagons would be needed?
>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>
>>>>>>> Normal freight shuttle, drive in, park, next artic follows, parks, next
>>>>>>> artic follows, park etc.
>>>>>>>
>>>>>>> With unaccompanied trailers they need to be backed on (full length of
>>>>>>> train to start, reducing as the train fills), dropped, tractor unit then
>>>>>>> needs to drive back up the full length of train before next trailer can
>>>>>>> be backed down etc.
>>>>>>>
>>>>>>> Very different process so current shuttle trains not practicable as the
>>>>>>> dropping process is very time consuming. Better to be done elsewhere
>>>>>>> where more space is available.
>>>>>>>
>>>>>>
>>>>>> Why such unnecessary complexity? Just use temporary, small shunting
>>>>>> tractor units to haul the trailers on to standard freight shuttles and off
>>>>>> at the other side. Ideally, these would be electric.
>>>>>>
>>>>>> So, articulated truck pulls in, the road tractor unit disconnects and
>>>>>> drives away to a holding/service area, while the waiting local shunting
>>>>>> tractor couples up and takes the trailer on to the train. These would be
>>>>>> driven by local shunting drivers (but ideally be self-driven) who
>>>>>>would not
>>>>>> go through the Tunnel. The process is reversed at the other side. The
>>>>>> shunting drivers just work in one terminal.
>>>>>>
>>>>>> So, no drivers waste time going through the Tunnel, and the road tractors
>>>>>> are released as soon as they drop off their trailers. They may then wait
>>>>>> for then next for their next load in a holding/service area, or go
>>>>>>straight
>>>>>> across to the pick-up area if the next load is already waiting for them.
>>>>>>
>>>>>
>>>>> You'd still need some works to the terminal areas, as they're not remotely
>>>>> set up for that kind of operation.
>>>>>
>>>>> Looking at Folkestone on Google maps, I guess there could be space found
>>>>> for tractor unit exchange somewhere before boarding (after check-in and
>>>>> customs, presumably?); for arriving trailers you could maybe make an
>>>>> exchange area somewhere near the fuel station? Or perhaps the nearby truck
>>>>> stop around 5km away would be more convenient.
>>>>
>>>> I think it would be highly desirable for the tractor swaps to happen
>>>> within the terminal area. That way, the small
>>>> shunting tractors won't need to be capable of hauling trailers on the
>>>> public highway.
>>>
>>> It's been said that the temporary tractors would have to be full size
>>> ones because there's no spare space at Folkestone.
>>
>>Perhaps the terminal would need to exand on to the next-door field?
>
>That's getting to be a pretty big project.

Yes, you're quite right, building a parking area on an empty field next to the terminal dwarfs the complexity of
building the tunnel!