[I/want/To/Marry/Chanelle]

They say that we are part of Europe because we are no longer an island anymore as we have a channel tunnel which connects us to our friends in France So if there was no tunnel, we wouldn't be part of Europe, that sounds silly to me

No tunnel, No part of Europe?
No tunnel, No connection?

[Scarlett.]

I agree!, there is land connecting us to the continent now, so we are part of Europe

[Captain.Remy]

Message original : I/want/To/Marry/Chanelle
They say that we are part of Europe because we are no longer an island anymore as we have a channel tunnel which connects us to our friends in France So if there was no tunnel, we wouldn't be part of Europe, that sounds silly to me

No tunnel, No part of Europe?
No tunnel, No connection?

In term of geography you take part into the Europe, as a continent.
The tunnel made things easier, like buisness, trades, jobs etc...
That's an awesome idea, everybody is happy now even if the compagny who made it made a flop lol

[Ann]

Originally posted by sunshine30

In term of geography you take part into the Europe, as a continent.
The tunnel made things easier, like buisness, trades, jobs etc...
That's an awesome idea, everybody is happy now even if the compagny who made it made a flop lol

very well pointed out Remy

[cepb]

It's made connections between Britan and Europe 10 times easier which means that marketing, and business is far easier and quicker.

So yes, it's an excellent idea.

[I/want/To/Marry/Chanelle]

Originally posted by sunshine30

In term of geography you take part into the Europe, as a continent.
The tunnel made things easier, like buisness, trades, jobs etc...
That's an awesome idea, everybody is happy now even if the compagny who made it made a flop lol

I think it is good that we can travel underground and reach France by tunnel, I am shocked that you say it was a flop how can it be a flop?

I am sure trade is great, but it was also great by ferry and ferry's and bigger ships can carry more

[Captain.Remy]

Message original : I/want/To/Marry/Chanelle

I think it is good that we can travel underground and reach France by tunnel, I am shocked that you say it was a flop how can it be a flop?

I am sure trade is great, but it was also great by ferry and ferry's and bigger ships can carry more

It's an economical flop, it was a huge scandal in France. The compagny who was supposed to control it is in fail, they are in debt. So the french government decided to stop the debt for a moment.

[I/want/To/Marry/Chanelle]

^ So when the plan came together that England started digging to the half-way-point of the English channel and France didn't manage it quite, is that what you are saying? they didn't have the money to fulfil their commitment to the project

[Captain.Remy]

Message original : I/want/To/Marry/Chanelle
^ So when the plan came together that England started digging to the half-way-point of the English channel and France didn't manage it quite, is that what you are saying? they didn't have the money to fulfil their commitment to the project

Yes, in France, it was hard even at the beginning, on an economic case. Now they haven'nt any solutions to risolve the problem, they spent too much money and people don't use it that much. They prefer the plane by far.
Because for exemple, a man who lives in Marseille (my city, south) as to go to Paris by train (3 hours) + Paris-Calais + Calais-England.
Plane Marseille-London: 1 hour an a half.

[Sticks]

This is an utter disaster

This is the way rabies will get in, how do we know that the blue tongue midges did not hitch a ride.

In the 19th century when they tried to do this, it was stopped by political pressure, as it could result in 20,000 frenchmen under the channel as an invasion force, (which was who we tended to fight in those days)

Imagine what would have happened if we had had a tunnel in WW2?

Later when plans were being made, Lord Mount Batton only agreed if they planted demolition charges in the infrastructure just incase, but that project in the 1970's thankfully went pearshaped.

The one that was finally done has been an economic disaster, especially with TML and EuroTunnel, but the strategic issue remains the same. I remember reading a letter from a WW2 vetran about what he would do if he won the lottery. He said he would get a submarine and deal with the ilegal Spanish trawlers and then save a couple of "fish" for the tunnel.

We had a perfectly goood ferry service, and being an island afforded us some protection from invasion and served as a barrier from certain diseases.

My other question is in this design, did they comply with the late Lord Mount Batton's requirement for strategic demolitions charges, or are at the mercy of which ever invading army plans to use this tunnel.

[Captain.Remy]

Message original : Sticks
This is an utter disaster

This is the way rabies will get in, how do we know that the blue tongue midges did not hitch a ride.

In the 19th century when they tried to do this, it was stopped by political pressure, as it could result in 20,000 frenchmen under the channel as an invasion force, (which was who we tended to fight in those days)

Imagine what would have happened if we had had a tunnel in WW2?

Later when plans were being made, Lord Mount Batton only agreed if they planted demolition charges in the infrastructure just incase, but that project in the 1970's thankfully went pearshaped.

The one that was finally done has been an economic disaster, especially with TML and EuroTunnel, but the strategic issue remains the same. I remember reading a letter from a WW2 vetran about what he would do if he won the lottery. He said he would get a submarine and deal with the ilegal Spanish trawlers and then save a couple of "fish" for the tunnel.

We had a perfectly goood ferry service, and being an island afforded us some protection from invasion and served as a barrier from certain diseases.

My other question is in this design, did they comply with the late Lord Mount Batton's requirement for strategic demolitions charges, or are at the mercy of which ever invading army plans to use this tunnel.

The tunnel was created after 1945 so wher's the problem about WW2 ? I don't understand your point.

[xXxCharlottexXx]

This may sound a bit silly, but if we weren't Europe, what will we be?

[Captain.Remy]

Message original : xXxCharlottexXx
This may sound a bit silly, but if we weren't Europe, what will we be?

United-Kingdom lol Nothing more.
But what you have heard was silly, you were taking part in Europe far before.

[Sunny_01]

Originally posted by Sticks
This is an utter disaster

This is the way rabies will get in, how do we know that the blue tongue midges did not hitch a ride.

In the 19th century when they tried to do this, it was stopped by political pressure, as it could result in 20,000 frenchmen under the channel as an invasion force, (which was who we tended to fight in those days)

Imagine what would have happened if we had had a tunnel in WW2?

Later when plans were being made, Lord Mount Batton only agreed if they planted demolition charges in the infrastructure just incase, but that project in the 1970's thankfully went pearshaped.

The one that was finally done has been an economic disaster, especially with TML and EuroTunnel, but the strategic issue remains the same. I remember reading a letter from a WW2 vetran about what he would do if he won the lottery. He said he would get a submarine and deal with the ilegal Spanish trawlers and then save a couple of "fish" for the tunnel.

We had a perfectly goood ferry service, and being an island afforded us some protection from invasion and served as a barrier from certain diseases.

My other question is in this design, did they comply with the late Lord Mount Batton's requirement for strategic demolitions charges, or are at the mercy of which ever invading army plans to use this tunnel.

To some extent I agree Sticks. Without the tunnel we were protected as an island and remained safer.

As for success, well there has been very little, it has cost a fortune to build and maintain and like Sunshine said many french prefer to fly anyway! ferries are frequent so why go under the water?

[Dr43%er]

From the BBC.

Eurotunnel has moved a step closer to restructuring its finances after reaching an outline deal with most of its creditors over its huge debt.

The Channel Tunnel operator said it had reached a preliminary binding deal with creditors, thought to hold more than half its £6.2bn ($11.4bn) debt pile.

But it still has to win agreement from other creditors and secure backing from outside investors for new financing.

Eurotunnel's future is in doubt unless it succeeds in revamping its finances.

Step forward

The firm - established in 1987 - has warned that it cannot guarantee its future beyond this year unless it renegotiates its debt satisfactorily.

In an update to investors, Eurotunnel said it had made progress in its protracted debt negotiations, winning approval from creditors thought to hold about £4bn of its debt.

It gave no details of what was contained in the agreement, but stressed that negotiations with financial institutions about a far-reaching corporate refinancing of the business were continuing.

Eurotunnel is talking to a number of potential investors, including a consortium including investment bank Goldman Sachs and Australian company Macquarie.

Shareholder approval

Eurotunnel is to seek legal approval in France to postpone its annual general meeting from 30 June 30 to 12 July.

By then, it hopes to be in a position to ask shareholders to approve the restructuring plan.

The firm has waived negotiations with creditors over its debts - the latest in a series of agreements enabling it to continue talks and to maintain its operations - until that day.

The Anglo-French firm has struggled ever since the tunnel opened in 1994 and last year announced 900 job cuts in an effort to reduce costs.

[I/want/To/Marry/Chanelle]

Originally posted by sunshine30

Yes, in France, it was hard even at the beginning, on an economic case. Now they haven'nt any solutions to risolve the problem, they spent too much money and people don't use it that much. They prefer the plane by far.
Because for exemple, a man who lives in Marseille (my city, south) as to go to Paris by train (3 hours) + Paris-Calais + Calais-England.
Plane Marseille-London: 1 hour an a half.

Oh I'd rather travel by plane, that's obviously faster and more convenient. Train journeys make me ill travel sickness and everything. I bet the journey by air will be pretty cheap too with all these cheap flights from cheap air travel companies.

So France ran into big financial problems over the cost of building the tunnel then? That is an embarassment to the government then. Bad money management. But the trains in France are mega fast so I hear. Virgin trains are using them as their example.

[Captain.Remy]

Message original : I/want/To/Marry/Chanelle

Oh I'd rather travel by plane, that's obviously faster and more convenient. Train journeys make me ill travel sickness and everything. I bet the journey by air will be pretty cheap too with all these cheap flights from cheap air travel companies.

So France ran into big financial problems over the cost of building the tunnel then? That is an embarassment to the government then. Bad money management. But the trains in France are mega fast so I hear. Virgin trains are using them as their example.

The concurrence with the plan was obvious, the flight prices are so low, I've been in England for €10 ! That's amazing.

That is a good idea but the French Goverment shouldn't have accepted to help them or to be involved. Now, the debate is sleeping....at the moment, but the topic about the debt is like a war over here.

Yes we got the best trains in the world, that's a fact, trains are really really fast. But trains work only between big cities like Paris, Marseille, Nice, Bordeaux.... Not between other countries.