A proposed tunnel between Denmark and Germany has been given the green light by a German court and the combined rail and road tunnel will reduce journey times between Denmark and Northern Germany when it opens in 2029. The Fehmarnbelt Tunnel is one of the largest infrastructure projects in Europe with a predicted cost of 7 billion euros. The 18 kilometer or 11 mile long tunnel will descend to depths of up to 40 meters or 131 feet under the Baltic Sea across the Fehmarn Belt. The design will consist of two double lane motorways and two electrified rail tracks. The tunnel is designed to replace the current ferry service between Puttgarden, Germany and Rodby, Denmark, which transports millions of passengers a year. The journey time will be reduced from 45 minutes by ferry to 7 minutes by train and 10 minutes by car. This comes after 30 years of planning and legal battles to build this project. The Fehmarnbelt Tunnel looks to be an impressive feat of engineering that will join the ranks of the Chunnel between Britain and France and the Oregon Bridge between Copenhagen and Malmo.
https://www.iamexpat.de/expat-info/germ ... 10-minutes

Oregon bridge? I think you meant to say "Øresund". But impressive as that bridge / tunnel combination is, it's not the biggest one in Denmark. That's the Great Belt bridge which, at one point, held the accolades for the longest suspension bridge in the world. Also happens to be the tallest point in Denmark, eclipsing the highest natural point by around 50 meters.

The Fehmarn tunnel will be a fantastic contributor to infrastructure development not just in Germany and Denmark, but for all of Scandinavia and Northern Europe.

In addition train links are updated Fehmarn Copenhagen, Fehmarn Hamburg.

Copenhagen - Stockholm, Copenhagen Guthenburg is also being updated.

Copenhagen Stockholm is being step by step updated with start Stockholm Linköping to be followed to the south the whole way Stockholm Copenhagen, Copenhagen Hamburg high speed.

The west coast is being updated Copenhagen Guthenburg, and Guthenburg Oslo is finished Guthenburg Vänersborg and partly close to the Norwegian borderline, But Norway has not neen interested in updating Oslo to the Swedish borderline neither Oslo Guthenburg nor Oslo Stockholm where train go nice to Karlstad close to Norway but do not enter Norway with speed.

B777LRF wrote:

Oregon bridge? I think you meant to say "Øresund". But impressive as that bridge / tunnel combination is, it's not the biggest one in Denmark. That's the Great Belt bridge which, at one point, held the accolades for the longest suspension bridge in the world. Also happens to be the tallest point in Denmark, eclipsing the highest natural point by around 50 meters.

The Fehmarn tunnel will be a fantastic contributor to infrastructure development not just in Germany and Denmark, but for all of Scandinavia and Northern Europe.

I actually meant the Oresund Bridge.

B777LRF wrote:

Oregon bridge? I think you meant to say "Øresund". But impressive as that bridge / tunnel combination is, it's not the biggest one in Denmark. That's the Great Belt bridge which, at one point, held the accolades for the longest suspension bridge in the world.

It depends a bit on how you define biggest, the Öresund link is longer but the Great Belt bridge is taller. But both are very impressive constructions!

luckyone wrote:

Is it just me, or does 7 billion euro seem rather low for a project of this scope?

Huh, it is a major project, but hardly a world scattering one.

To put it in perspective, it is exactly a five times longer version of the 3.5 km tunnel which makes the minor western part of the Øresund Bridge. The same four motorway lanes and two rail tracks, same construction technology, roughly identical geology.

Only 18 km tunnel connecting Denmark and Germany, instead of 3.5 km tunnel connecting Denmark and the artificial island from where the real bridge to Sweden begins.

It is not a drilled tunnel like for instance the Channel Tunnel. Construction modules are lowered into a digged trench on the sea bed. It's a well proven technology in several places in Denmark when geology is hundreds of feet of mud, and also in Germany, for instance the Elb Tunnels in Hamburg.

€7bn is still kind of money, and let's hope that cost overuns will be manageable.

I went on a train from Hamburg to Copenhagen last year. The stretch where the train gets loaded onto a ferry (MS Prins Richard in my case) for the journey between Puttgarden and Rodby was very cool - so it will be a shame to lose this. The benefits however of reduced travel times far out weigh this and it is great to see rail become more efficient and convenient.

prebennorholm wrote:

luckyone wrote:

Is it just me, or does 7 billion euro seem rather low for a project of this scope?

Huh, it is a major project, but hardly a world scattering one.

To put it in perspective, it is exactly a five times longer version of the 3.5 km tunnel which makes the minor western part of the Øresund Bridge. The same four motorway lanes and two rail tracks, same construction technology, roughly identical geology.

Only 18 km tunnel connecting Denmark and Germany, instead of 3.5 km tunnel connecting Denmark and the artificial island from where the real bridge to Sweden begins.

It is not a drilled tunnel like for instance the Channel Tunnel. Construction modules are lowered into a digged trench on the sea bed. It's a well proven technology in several places in Denmark when geology is hundreds of feet of mud, and also in Germany, for instance the Elb Tunnels in Hamburg.

€7bn is still kind of money, and let's hope that cost overuns will be manageable.

What makes it safe to build a road tunnel at this length?

luckyone wrote:

Is it just me, or does 7 billion euro seem rather low for a project of this scope?

My thoughts too. If similar projects are any indication, they'll have spent the 7 billion before they even have a TBM digging under the ocean bed.

That said, budgets are always a bit moot for these kind of projects. At this early stage, they're more of a deflated ballpark figure that allow politicians to get the ball rolling.

zkojq wrote:

I went on a train from Hamburg to Copenhagen last year. The stretch where the train gets loaded onto a ferry (MS Prins Richard in my case) for the journey between Puttgarden and Rodby was very cool - so it will be a shame to lose this. The benefits however of reduced travel times far out weigh this and it is great to see rail become more efficient and convenient.

I often go to Wolfsburg and Hannover from South part of Stockholm. For this the tunnel and improvement of tracks and electrification in denmark will be fantastic. No more air flights in the future to those meetings.

Francoflier wrote:

luckyone wrote:

Is it just me, or does 7 billion euro seem rather low for a project of this scope?

My thoughts too. If similar projects are any indication, they'll have spent the 7 billion before they even have a TBM digging under the ocean bed..

There won´t be a TBM for this project, its an Immersed tube tunnel and there is plenty of experience regarding costs for that kind of tunnel in that kind of environment.

The 7 Billion already include one billion for cost over runs.

best regards
Thomas

zkojq wrote:

I went on a train from Hamburg to Copenhagen last year. The stretch where the train gets loaded onto a ferry (MS Prins Richard in my case) for the journey between Puttgarden and Rodby was very cool - so it will be a shame to lose this. The benefits however of reduced travel times far out weigh this and it is great to see rail become more efficient and convenient.

I’ll be surprise if they stop the ferries, they make a crap load of money from tax free alcohol, not something that they will be able to do on a train.

ArchGuy1 wrote:

prebennorholm wrote:

luckyone wrote:

Is it just me, or does 7 billion euro seem rather low for a project of this scope?

Huh, it is a major project, but hardly a world scattering one.

To put it in perspective, it is exactly a five times longer version of the 3.5 km tunnel which makes the minor western part of the Øresund Bridge. The same four motorway lanes and two rail tracks, same construction technology, roughly identical geology.

Only 18 km tunnel connecting Denmark and Germany, instead of 3.5 km tunnel connecting Denmark and the artificial island from where the real bridge to Sweden begins.

It is not a drilled tunnel like for instance the Channel Tunnel. Construction modules are lowered into a digged trench on the sea bed. It's a well proven technology in several places in Denmark when geology is hundreds of feet of mud, and also in Germany, for instance the Elb Tunnels in Hamburg.

€7bn is still kind of money, and let's hope that cost overuns will be manageable.

What makes it safe to build a road tunnel at this length?

There’s a 24.5km road tunnel in Norway, the longest subsea tunnel is 14km, there are over 750km of tunnels in Norway.

Will this impact aviation in the region in general and for CPH/BER in particular and if so how?

I think that the rail construction stockholm copenhagen will be very big effect.
Also there will be sleeping wagons stockholm hamburg and malmö (copenhaagen) bryssels.

I think this means that soon stockholm copenhaagen hamburg will be frequent used by business people and tourists.

Oslo is more complicated of political reasons. Rail connections to sweden is not high priority.

zkojq wrote:

I went on a train from Hamburg to Copenhagen last year. The stretch where the train gets loaded onto a ferry (MS Prins Richard in my case) for the journey between Puttgarden and Rodby was very cool - so it will be a shame to lose this. The benefits however of reduced travel times far out weigh this and it is great to see rail become more efficient and convenient.

The trains stopped running via the ferries. They run through Jutland and Schleswig-Holstein now.

Kiwirob wrote:

zkojq wrote:

I went on a train from Hamburg to Copenhagen last year. The stretch where the train gets loaded onto a ferry (MS Prins Richard in my case) for the journey between Puttgarden and Rodby was very cool - so it will be a shame to lose this. The benefits however of reduced travel times far out weigh this and it is great to see rail become more efficient and convenient.

I’ll be surprise if they stop the ferries, they make a crap load of money from tax free alcohol, not something that they will be able to do on a train.

It'll be a combined car and rail tunnel. The reason the ferries will continue is because it will cost 494 DKK / 702 NOK / 66 EUR one way for a car (prices to be adjusted for inflation). The ferry today for a car on a return ticket costs 299 DKK / 424 NOK / 40 EUR.

Thunderboltdrgn wrote:

Will this impact aviation in the region in general and for CPH/BER in particular and if so how?

CPH-HAM will struggle after the tunnel is opened, but maybe SAS will keep it for connecting passengers. Copenhagen to Berlin will be less than 5 hours by train, so I guess at least Easyjet will abandon CPH-BER.

On the other hand, who knows what the aviation market will look like in 5 years?

Bostrom wrote:

Thunderboltdrgn wrote:

Will this impact aviation in the region in general and for CPH/BER in particular and if so how?

CPH-HAM will struggle after the tunnel is opened, but maybe SAS will keep it for connecting passengers. Copenhagen to Berlin will be less than 5 hours by train, so I guess at least Easyjet will abandon CPH-BER.

On the other hand, who knows what the aviation market will look like in 5 years?

Did the opening of the Chunnel affect the operations of the air route between London and Paris?

ArchGuy1 wrote:

Did the opening of the Chunnel affect the operations of the air route between London and Paris?

Yes, Eurostar now has around 75% market share on the London-Paris route.

Bostrom wrote:

ArchGuy1 wrote:

Did the opening of the Chunnel affect the operations of the air route between London and Paris?

Yes, Eurostar now has around 75% market share on the London-Paris route.

Once high speed rail is expanded in the Northeast, it will affect operations between Washington DC, Boston, New York, and Philadelphia.

Bostrom wrote:

ArchGuy1 wrote:

Did the opening of the Chunnel affect the operations of the air route between London and Paris?

Yes, Eurostar now has around 75% market share on the London-Paris route.

We are about to have a triangle copenhaagen guthenburg stockholm where train is or will become the first option. I see that with corporate policy "flygskam" avoiding air soon hamburg berlin will be a logical extension on this triangle.

Considering how close Swedish business getting to german business...

Oslo should be connected ASAP.

Bostrom wrote:

ArchGuy1 wrote:

Did the opening of the Chunnel affect the operations of the air route between London and Paris?

Yes, Eurostar now has around 75% market share on the London-Paris route.

With an impact like that, it would not be surprising if US airlines are fighting tooth and nail to stop or at least slow down HSR on certain segments (Northeast Corridor, LA-SF, Texas Triangle, etc.).

Could Oslo benefit from this new rail link? They've been building the Follo Line between Oslo and Ski to speed up and add train capacity from Oslo going south towards Gothenburg.

af773atmsp wrote:

With an impact like that, it would not be surprising if US airlines are fighting tooth and nail to stop or at least slow down HSR on certain segments (Northeast Corridor, LA-SF, Texas Triangle, etc.).

According to civil engineers on a railroad website that I frequent, the NEC has too many relatively sharp curves to ever be a truly HSR. Many parts of it would have to be rerouted.

ArchGuy1 wrote:

What makes it safe to build a road tunnel at this length?

EU Directive No. 2004/54/EC

https://eur-lex.europa.eu/legal-content ... 32004L0054

This tunnel seems like a no brainer, why 30 years of legal battles ? Is there a significant environmental impact (I wouldn't think so) ?

10 minutes by car for 18Km, now that seems low, that would be 110Km/h, doesn't seem like a good idea in such a tunnel. Wouldn't 70Km/h be more typical ?

VSMUT wrote:

It'll be a combined car and rail tunnel. The reason the ferries will continue is because it will cost 494 DKK / 702 NOK / 66 EUR one way for a car (prices to be adjusted for inflation). The ferry today for a car on a return ticket costs 299 DKK / 424 NOK / 40 EUR.

Incorrect. The EUR 40 price for a return is only valid way outside of peak. The "normal" price of a return is in the EUR 100-150 range. Trust me, I've been on that ferry more times than I care to remember. The tunnel will thus only be marginally more expensive than the ferry.

Kiwirob wrote:

I’ll be surprise if they stop the ferries, they make a crap load of money from tax free alcohol, not something that they will be able to do on a train.

As the ferry operate between two EU countries there's no taxfree sale onboard. Besides, the vast majority of shopping revenue is generated in the "Bordershops" operated by Scandlines, catering almost exclusively to Scandinavians taking advantage of lower VAT, sugar and alcohol taxes in Germany. There's nothing stopping Scandlines from keeping the Bordershop in Puttgarden open, and I'm sure they will retain that part of the business.

Scandlines fought a hard and prolonged battle to stop the tunnel, ultimately lost, and the writing is now very much on the wall spelling the demise of the Rødby-Puttgarden ferry connection.

olle wrote:

We are about to have a triangle copenhaagen guthenburg stockholm where train is or will become the first option. I see that with corporate policy "flygskam" avoiding air soon hamburg berlin will be a logical extension on this triangle.

Funny way of spelling Copenhagen and Gothenburg; if you're going to be odd about it why not write it in the original languages (København & Göteborg)?

Anyway, "flygskam" is still very much a Swedish thing, and long may it remain that way. I for one, however, can't see how a 5,5 hour train ride costing the same (or more) can compete with a 1 hour flight between CPH and ARN. If I want to go for a day of meetings in Stockholm from Copenhagen (or vv), I'll have to depart at 06:00 to be in Stockholm for 11:30, and leave Stockholm at 18:00 to be in Copenhagen by 23:30. That's a lot of wasted time considering the flight is only 1 hour in each direction. They'll need to cut, at least, 2 hours off the train ride in each direction to be competitive, and do so without raising the ticket prices. Good luck with that!

Aesma wrote:

This tunnel seems like a no brainer, why 30 years of legal battles ? Is there a significant environmental impact (I wouldn't think so) ?

10 minutes by car for 18Km, now that seems low, that would be 110Km/h, doesn't seem like a good idea in such a tunnel. Wouldn't 70Km/h be more typical ?

Twin tubes, one direction per tube, no oncoming traffic, no danger.

B777LRF wrote:

olle wrote:

We are about to have a triangle copenhaagen guthenburg stockholm where train is or will become the first option. I see that with corporate policy "flygskam" avoiding air soon hamburg berlin will be a logical extension on this triangle.

Funny way of spelling Copenhagen and Gothenburg; if you're going to be odd about it why not write it in the original languages (København & Göteborg)?

Anyway, "flygskam" is still very much a Swedish thing, and long may it remain that way. I for one, however, can't see how a 5,5 hour train ride costing the same (or more) can compete with a 1 hour flight between CPH and ARN. If I want to go for a day of meetings in Stockholm from Copenhagen (or vv), I'll have to depart at 06:00 to be in Stockholm for 11:30, and leave Stockholm at 18:00 to be in Copenhagen by 23:30. That's a lot of wasted time considering the flight is only 1 hour in each direction. They'll need to cut, at least, 2 hours off the train ride in each direction to be competitive, and do so without raising the ticket prices. Good luck with that!

Deprends on where you live. I live about 100 km west of Stockholm (souther side of Läke Mälaren) and you forget the time it would take for me to get to Arlanda airport.
It's about 1 hour and 40 minutes by train (if I choose the train that goes all the way to Uppsala) from the Centralstation in the city where I live to Arlanda station. Then it would be
nice to have some margin in case there is delays so add another hour to that. Then you need to go through security and find your gate.When your flight arrives at CPH
you need to wait for luggage and then a 20 min train ride to Copenhagen. Once at the hotel your one hour flight will be a 4+ hour journey.

For me the train would be just short of 5½ hours which in the end isn't that much big time difference. Personally I would never choose the plane over the train,
especially not in the summer when you can get some really good deals on 1st class tickets on SJ's X2000 trains.

If you live in Stockholm area or north of Stockholm/Lake Mälaren then flying is probably the better option.

Thunderboltdrgn wrote:

B777LRF wrote:

olle wrote:

We are about to have a triangle copenhaagen guthenburg stockholm where train is or will become the first option. I see that with corporate policy "flygskam" avoiding air soon hamburg berlin will be a logical extension on this triangle.

Funny way of spelling Copenhagen and Gothenburg; if you're going to be odd about it why not write it in the original languages (København & Göteborg)?

Anyway, "flygskam" is still very much a Swedish thing, and long may it remain that way. I for one, however, can't see how a 5,5 hour train ride costing the same (or more) can compete with a 1 hour flight between CPH and ARN. If I want to go for a day of meetings in Stockholm from Copenhagen (or vv), I'll have to depart at 06:00 to be in Stockholm for 11:30, and leave Stockholm at 18:00 to be in Copenhagen by 23:30. That's a lot of wasted time considering the flight is only 1 hour in each direction. They'll need to cut, at least, 2 hours off the train ride in each direction to be competitive, and do so without raising the ticket prices. Good luck with that!

This is the story.. I live 45 min south of STockholm and Arlanda is 30 min north in low traffic.

I enter the train in Södertälje, 10 min from my house park in front of the station.

On the train I work and arrive in Hannover in late afternoon. Go to ARN fly to Hamburg or Berlin, take taxi to train station then go to Wolfsburg I arrive 2 pm in the afternoon.

In practice I cannot work and only have 2 hours for meeting anyway.

With new tracks Stockholm København it will take 4 hours door to door. For me will be less then going to ARN then fly the 1 hour + security controls.

Ostlänken is already started from Södertälje (Stockholm) and will in extension go the whole way to København.

https://www.trafikverket.se/en/startpag ... k-project/

The train is a bit on the slow side to Sweden. What would really kill aviation off on the route would be a proper high speed line capable of more than 200 km/h. With a 320 km/h line, the train would come down to around 2:30, way faster than the plane could do once waiting time at the airport is included.

Thunderboltdrgn wrote:

B777LRF wrote:

olle wrote:

We are about to have a triangle copenhaagen guthenburg stockholm where train is or will become the first option. I see that with corporate policy "flygskam" avoiding air soon hamburg berlin will be a logical extension on this triangle.

Funny way of spelling Copenhagen and Gothenburg; if you're going to be odd about it why not write it in the original languages (København & Göteborg)?

Anyway, "flygskam" is still very much a Swedish thing, and long may it remain that way. I for one, however, can't see how a 5,5 hour train ride costing the same (or more) can compete with a 1 hour flight between CPH and ARN. If I want to go for a day of meetings in Stockholm from Copenhagen (or vv), I'll have to depart at 06:00 to be in Stockholm for 11:30, and leave Stockholm at 18:00 to be in Copenhagen by 23:30. That's a lot of wasted time considering the flight is only 1 hour in each direction. They'll need to cut, at least, 2 hours off the train ride in each direction to be competitive, and do so without raising the ticket prices. Good luck with that!

Deprends on where you live. I live about 100 km west of Stockholm (souther side of Läke Mälaren) and you forget the time it would take for me to get to Arlanda airport.
It's about 1 hour and 40 minutes by train (if I choose the train that goes all the way to Uppsala) from the Centralstation in the city where I live to Arlanda station. Then it would be
nice to have some margin in case there is delays so add another hour to that. Then you need to go through security and find your gate.When your flight arrives at CPH
you need to wait for luggage and then a 20 min train ride to Copenhagen. Once at the hotel your one hour flight will be a 4+ hour journey.

For me the train would be just short of 5½ hours which in the end isn't that much big time difference. Personally I would never choose the plane over the train,
especially not in the summer when you can get some really good deals on 1st class tickets on SJ's X2000 trains.

If you live in Stockholm area or north of Stockholm/Lake Mälaren then flying is probably the better option.

Let's not forget the additional price for getting to and from the airport. Copenhagen is cheap, just 36 DKK between Nørreport and the airport. The Arlanda Express on the other hand is expensive, around 220 DKK. You could of course take the bus and local train, but that would take a lot more time.

The air-route does not see much competition that keeps the prices down. Just SAS and Norwegian, and we all know how Norwegian is doing. Looking at prices for tomorrow, SAS is charging from €315 / 2344 DKK. The SJ train costs from 445 DKK, first class from 662 DKK. SAS does get cheaper if we plan a couple weeks out (and oddly SJ gets more expensive), but the train is still cheaper in first class.

ArchGuy1 wrote:

Bostrom wrote:

ArchGuy1 wrote:

Did the opening of the Chunnel affect the operations of the air route between London and Paris?

Yes, Eurostar now has around 75% market share on the London-Paris route.

Once high speed rail is expanded in the Northeast, it will affect operations between Washington DC, Boston, New York, and Philadelphia.

I assume you are american (since you used the term "Chunnel"), but yes, high speed rail will affect airlines a lot. There are countless examples of it, Barcelona-Madrid e.g.

B777LRF wrote:

Anyway, "flygskam" is still very much a Swedish thing, and long may it remain that way. I for one, however, can't see how a 5,5 hour train ride costing the same (or more) can compete with a 1 hour flight between CPH and ARN. If I want to go for a day of meetings in Stockholm from Copenhagen (or vv), I'll have to depart at 06:00 to be in Stockholm for 11:30, and leave Stockholm at 18:00 to be in Copenhagen by 23:30. That's a lot of wasted time considering the flight is only 1 hour in each direction. They'll need to cut, at least, 2 hours off the train ride in each direction to be competitive, and do so without raising the ticket prices. Good luck with that!

1. The direct train (no change in Malmö) is 5 hours, a bit slower than flying but not that much.
2. The price is not the same. Train tickets start at 195 SEK in 2nd class, 295 SEK in 1st class. Flying costs a lot more, neither SAS nor Norwegian have been selling tickets for less than 500 SEK.
3. There is a lot more wasted time when you fly. On the train, you can get close to 5 hours of work done, and there is no restriction on using electronic equipment when arriving at a station. It is a lot harder to get anything done when flying due to interruptions of all kinds.

Bostrom wrote:

ArchGuy1 wrote:

Bostrom wrote:

Yes, Eurostar now has around 75% market share on the London-Paris route.

Once high speed rail is expanded in the Northeast, it will affect operations between Washington DC, Boston, New York, and Philadelphia.

I assume you are american (since you used the term "Chunnel"), but yes, high speed rail will affect airlines a lot. There are countless examples of it, Barcelona-Madrid e.g.

B777LRF wrote:

Anyway, "flygskam" is still very much a Swedish thing, and long may it remain that way. I for one, however, can't see how a 5,5 hour train ride costing the same (or more) can compete with a 1 hour flight between CPH and ARN. If I want to go for a day of meetings in Stockholm from Copenhagen (or vv), I'll have to depart at 06:00 to be in Stockholm for 11:30, and leave Stockholm at 18:00 to be in Copenhagen by 23:30. That's a lot of wasted time considering the flight is only 1 hour in each direction. They'll need to cut, at least, 2 hours off the train ride in each direction to be competitive, and do so without raising the ticket prices. Good luck with that!

1. The direct train (no change in Malmö) is 5 hours, a bit slower than flying but not that much.
2. The price is not the same. Train tickets start at 195 SEK in 2nd class, 295 SEK in 1st class. Flying costs a lot more, neither SAS nor Norwegian have been selling tickets for less than 500 SEK.
3. There is a lot more wasted time when you fly. On the train, you can get close to 5 hours of work done, and there is no restriction on using electronic equipment when arriving at a station. It is a lot harder to get anything done when flying due to interruptions of all kinds.

Normally GSM internet supports you well while working.

Aesma wrote:

This tunnel seems like a no brainer, why 30 years of legal battles ?

German re-unification.

Denmark has been pressing for this tunnel for decades, but since 1990 Germany certainly had other infrastructure jobs on higher priority.

In 1990 East Germany was a complete mess. It has been immensely expensive to rebulld it. Nice-to-have things like this tunnel had to wait for more pressing needs to be completed.

Also the BER Scandal hasn't really promoted the political climate in favor of major traffic infrastructure projects in Germany.

prebennorholm wrote:

Also the BER Scandal hasn't really promoted the political climate in favor of major traffic infrastructure projects in Germany.

BER was boondoggled by politicians not wanting it ( TXL is much faster to reach than BER )
Federal ministry of transport is Bavaria led*. They have their own agenda of pushing MUC vs BER.
corruption, dysfunctional planning and execution, .. is direct fall out from this.


Nimbys and Treehuggers enabled by "Verbandsklagerecht".

Going to court is a strategic asset independent of the courts decission.
( delays increase cost, change the legal background that again causes project changes incl. delays and
opens the door for new litigation. rinse repeat. and, suprise, 3 decades have passed without real progress.

* same kind of corruption and mismanagement visible around the Kiel Kanal.

prebennorholm wrote:

In 1990 East Germany was a complete mess. It has been immensely expensive to rebulld it..

and "immensely expensive" means 2 Trillion EUR..... and that is not all, since there now is a significant infrastructure backlog in the western states (and that work is actually limited by supply, enough money has been made available).

best regards
Thomas

WIederling wrote:

BER was boondoggled by politicians not wanting it ( TXL is much faster to reach than BER )
Federal ministry of transport is Bavaria led*. They have their own agenda of pushing MUC vs BER.
corruption, dysfunctional planning and execution, .. is direct fall out from this.

You have a source?

tommy1808 wrote:

and "immensely expensive" means 2 Trillion EUR..... and that is not all, since there now is a significant infrastructure backlog in the western states (and that work is actually limited by supply, enough money has been made available).

best regards
Thomas

That may explain why infrastructure projects are so expensive.
Can you expand what part of the supply is affected and why?

Sokes wrote:

tommy1808 wrote:

and "immensely expensive" means 2 Trillion EUR..... and that is not all, since there now is a significant infrastructure backlog in the western states (and that work is actually limited by supply, enough money has been made available).

best regards
Thomas

Can you expand what part of the supply is affected and why?

between private companies and the government there are more construction contracts available then construction companies can full fill.

best regards
Thomas

Sokes wrote:

WIederling wrote:

BER was boondoggled by politicians not wanting it ( TXL is much faster to reach than BER )
Federal ministry of transport is Bavaria led*. They have their own agenda of pushing MUC vs BER.
corruption, dysfunctional planning and execution, .. is direct fall out from this.

You have a source?

Just go over news and gov. reports. Things have a smell.
Nothing that could be leveraged easily in court.
Look at all the things that Transport Minister Scheuer has managed to mismanage.
His predecessor was similarly active.
The town of Rendsburg is going to court for commercial damages in relation to
a tunnel refurbish taking more than a decade and still not finished with major
impact on commuter travel and transport around the region.

Sad thing is that a majority of cases never really blow up. they continue to fester though.
The majority "verläuft im Sand".

prebennorholm wrote:

Aesma wrote:

This tunnel seems like a no brainer, why 30 years of legal battles ?

German re-unification.

Denmark has been pressing for this tunnel for decades, but since 1990 Germany certainly had other infrastructure jobs on higher priority.

In 1990 East Germany was a complete mess. It has been immensely expensive to rebulld it. Nice-to-have things like this tunnel had to wait for more pressing needs to be completed.

Also the BER Scandal hasn't really promoted the political climate in favor of major traffic infrastructure projects in Germany.

As I remember Denmark take the economical risk. Germany has as task to finance the infrasyructure connecting Lübeck to Fehrmarn.

WIederling wrote:

Sokes wrote:

WIederling wrote:

BER was boondoggled by politicians not wanting it ( TXL is much faster to reach than BER )
Federal ministry of transport is Bavaria led*. They have their own agenda of pushing MUC vs BER.
corruption, dysfunctional planning and execution, .. is direct fall out from this.

You have a source?

Just go over news and gov. reports. Things have a smell.
Nothing that could be leveraged easily in court.

of course it could be coincidence that Bavaria seems to always get more money out of the infrastructure budget than North Rhine-Westphalia, despite the latter having more people, streets and rail lines......

best regards
Thomas

Bostrom wrote:

ArchGuy1 wrote:

Bostrom wrote:

Yes, Eurostar now has around 75% market share on the London-Paris route.

Once high speed rail is expanded in the Northeast, it will affect operations between Washington DC, Boston, New York, and Philadelphia.

I assume you are american (since you used the term "Chunnel"), but yes, high speed rail will affect airlines a lot. There are countless examples of it, Barcelona-Madrid e.g.

B777LRF wrote:

Anyway, "flygskam" is still very much a Swedish thing, and long may it remain that way. I for one, however, can't see how a 5,5 hour train ride costing the same (or more) can compete with a 1 hour flight between CPH and ARN. If I want to go for a day of meetings in Stockholm from Copenhagen (or vv), I'll have to depart at 06:00 to be in Stockholm for 11:30, and leave Stockholm at 18:00 to be in Copenhagen by 23:30. That's a lot of wasted time considering the flight is only 1 hour in each direction. They'll need to cut, at least, 2 hours off the train ride in each direction to be competitive, and do so without raising the ticket prices. Good luck with that!

1. The direct train (no change in Malmö) is 5 hours, a bit slower than flying but not that much.
2. The price is not the same. Train tickets start at 195 SEK in 2nd class, 295 SEK in 1st class. Flying costs a lot more, neither SAS nor Norwegian have been selling tickets for less than 500 SEK.
3. There is a lot more wasted time when you fly. On the train, you can get close to 5 hours of work done, and there is no restriction on using electronic equipment when arriving at a station. It is a lot harder to get anything done when flying due to interruptions of all kinds.

Each year the next 10-30 years the rail will be upgraded and the time will go down from 5 hours to perhaps 3.5 hours Stockholm region Malmò /;køpenhavn. In the moment it get close 4 hours air option will be less valued special if you live south of Sockholm or have meetings south of Stockholm. The whole area Stockholm, Norrköping Linköping has big business with a lot of travel like SAAB, Scania etc.

Those companies and government also is sensitive for climate.

https://www.theguardian.com/environment ... te-lawsuit

My company already has climate change as a inputs to travel options. So if rail is similar in time to air rail is now default.

olle wrote:

As I remember Denmark take the economical risk.

Germany has as task to finance the infrasyructure connecting Lübeck to Fehrmarn.

I see the tunnel itself finished and the (German) Hinterland connection still in the "courts will be courts" phase.

WIederling wrote:

I see the tunnel itself finished and the (German) Hinterland connection still in the "courts will be courts" phase.

Would not surprise me at all.

Similar to the Betuweroute. A dedicated freight railline linking the port of Rotterdam with the Ruhr area.

Construction on the Ducth segment was started in 1997 and finished in 2007. According to the original timetable the German works, adding a third track to an existing route, should have been finished in 2003. Germany started partial construction in 2016. For some sections not all permits have been sorted out yet. In 2021 the permits are expected to be completed... the line itself no sooner then 2026.

tommy1808 wrote:

of course it could be coincidence that Bavaria seems to always get more money out of the infrastructure budget than North Rhine-Westphalia, despite the latter having more people, streets and rail lines......

best regards
Thomas

I 'm not convinced about the Bavarian conspiracy concerning Berlin airport.
However the infrastructure finance argument sounds interesting.

I don't understand how this project didn't get built 30 years back:
https://www.rheinruhrexpress.de/kurzbeschreibung.html
(In German)

Even though:
You have a source that Bavaria gets preferential treatment?

WIederling wrote:

olle wrote:

As I remember Denmark take the economical risk.

Germany has as task to finance the infrasyructure connecting Lübeck to Fehrmarn.

I see the tunnel itself finished and the (German) Hinterland connection still in the "courts will be courts" phase.

Denmark will pay out of the nose for it, Germany has little interest in finishing the link and it will benefit only the small elite in Copenhagen and the Swedes.

prebennorholm wrote:

Denmark has been pressing for this tunnel for decades

Lets be real, only Copenhagen has been pressing for it. It benefits almost nobody else in Denmark.

VSMUT wrote:

prebennorholm wrote:

Denmark has been pressing for this tunnel for decades

Lets be real, only Copenhagen has been pressing for it. It benefits almost nobody else in Denmark.

with~40% of all Danes living in the Copenhagen metropolitan area that seem like a pretty cheap piece of infrastructure.

Denmark will pay out of the nose for it, Germany has little interest in finishing the link

The Street connection is already funded and there are only 4 outstanding legal complains, none of which has a good chance, and they have only been pushed into 2021 due to covid.

For rail (PFA 6), also funded, the deadline for complains was this October.

best regards
Thomas

tommy1808 wrote:

VSMUT wrote:

Lets be real, only Copenhagen has been pressing for it. It benefits almost nobody else in Denmark.

with~40% of all Danes living in the Copenhagen metropolitan area that seem like a pretty cheap piece of infrastructure.

As opposed to improved connections across Funnen and through Jutland and Schleswig Holstein, that would benefit not just people from Copenhagen going on holiday, but also internal links through Denmark that are notoriously congested and in dire need of investment...