Fehmarn-Belt Road-Rail Tunnel between Denmark and Germany

Femern A/S - Fehmarnbelt Fixed Link It will link Germany and southeastern Denmark, creating a Germany-Copenhagen route about 160 km (100 mi) shorter than the existing one through Denmark's western peninsula (Jutland).

Denmark has two existing long road-rail bridge-tunnels in its eastern Islands: the 21-km (13-mi) Great Belt one, opened in 1997 (rail) and 1998 (road), and the 15-km (9-mi) Øresund bridge-tunnel between Copenhagen and Malmö, Sweden, opened in 2000.

The 18-km (11-mi) Fehmarn Belt one will connect Puttgarden, Germany, and Rødbyhavn, Denmark, and will be a tunnel without a bridge, instead of the earlier-planned bridge-tunnel. It will be an immersed tunnel, constructed from 217-m segments lowered into place. These segments will be 79 ordinary ones and 10 special ones, the latter ones containing room for equipment below the road tunnels. It will have two pairs of road lanes and two tracks, and it will be about 5 times longer than the tunnel at Øresund, which has a similar design.

Tendering begins for Fehmarnbelt Fixed Link | International Railway Journal The contracting process has started, and construction contracts should be signed by next year. Construction should also begin then, and the tunnel should open in 2021.

Also,

While the tunnel itself is progressing, infrastructure managers in Denmark and Germany are developing plans for the connecting railways. The tunnel's rail infrastructure will interface with the Banedanmark network 5km from the northern portal, and meet German tracks 3km from the southern portal. The 119km line from Ringsted to Vordingborg and Rødby will be rebuilt for 200km/h operation, which will include construction of a new alignment north of Glumsø and the relocation of Glumsø station; track-doubling on the Vordingborg - Holeby section; and construction of new bridges over the Masnedsund and Guldborgsund. The Storstrøm Bridge between the islands of Falster and Zealand will also be rebuilt. Detailed design is at an advanced stage and Banedanmark will issue tenders for the project soon.

On the German side, the 88km Lübeck - Puttgarden line will be electrified, double-tracked and upgraded for 160km/h operation. Alignment studies are being carried out, although the specification for the project has not yet been finalised.

Denmark has been upgrading its rail network, doing double-tracking, electrification, and increasing the maximum speeds on them.
Denmark pumps oil money into rail upgrades | International Railway Journal
One hour plan to shrink Danish journey times | International Railway Journal
Denmark breaks ground on Ringsted – Fehmarn upgrade | International Railway Journal

The links to the international Railway Journal are Interesting, not just for Denmark, but for other aspects of of the industry. My uninformed reaction to the tunnels under the Baltic sea is why? Aren't airplanes for passengers and ships for freight cheaper?
Here's a link to wiki Fehmarn Belt Fixed Link http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Fehmarn_Belt_Fixed_Link" onclick="window.open(this.href);return false;
Here's a link to the wiki article of the IC4 Danish train fiasco. http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/IC4" onclick="window.open(this.href);return false;

I never made it to Denmark, but I would say a large % of the population would prefer to take the train, rather than fly.
as far as freight goes, ship would be port to port, whereas rail would be rail yard to railyard. presuming no private sidings.

High-speed trains successfully compete with paralleling short-distance flights in many of the places where they run, and a good part of that is because their stations are usually much more accessible than airports. So I think that that will also be true here. Also, about freight, it would have to be transferred from trains to ships and then to trains again, though with rail ferries, the trains can travel on the ships.

I've discovered a proposal for a HH Tunnel between Helsingør, DK and Helsingborg, SE, a little north of Copenhagen. It would be several tunnels, for roads, freight trains, and passenger trains, and they would all be about 4.5 km (2.8 mi) long.

I've also discovered a proposed Gedser-Rostock Bridge between Gedser in SE Denmark and Rostock in NE Germany. Though it would have been longer than the Fehmarn Belt tunnel, at about 45 km (28 mi), much of it is in shallower water, enabling construction of low bridges for much of it. But the articles referenced in that Wikipedia entry cut off at about 2007, when the politicians decided to build the Fehmarn Belt tunnel instead.

I have entered Denmark by rail through both routes. The ferry can be quite nice, with a shower - useful after several days travel - and a restaurant. I have also entered from the Peninsula by direct train to Kobenhavn. The new tunnel will improve Denmark's connections to Germany and the rest of Europe. It will also be useful for Sweden. And note that as the rail routes are now electrified, with the electricity coming from Swedish and Norwegian hydropower, the new routes contribute to carbon emissions reduction.

Note that like the other bridges-tunnels it will have a road connection as well as a rail line.

BTW all the routes between Germany and Denmark take freight as well as passengers, though probably most rail freight goes by the peninsula route.

Also Denmark's wind turbines. Denmark nowadays gets a lot of its electricity from those giant windmills.

Picked off youtube:
"Johan Kristoffer Karlsen to Jazz D: this is in Norway on the west coast in Nordmøre in Møre og Romsdal county.Orriginally was a local road about 8274 m long, between Vevang in Eide and Kårvåg in Averøy
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=PUm-Ns2Ea6w" onclick="window.open(this.href);return false;

David Benton wrote:I never made it to Denmark, but I would say a large % of the population would prefer to take the train, rather than fly.
as far as freight goes, ship would be port to port, whereas rail would be rail yard to railyard. presuming no private sidings.

All lines there have frequent passenger trains - at least hourly. Which makes it convenient to take the train.

International trains are of course less frequent but there is a good choice of trains from Germany by both routes.

Thanks George, I really cant imagine why anyone would want to fly , given a choice of fast frequent trains. Though i guess people may choose to drive , if it is more convienent.

David Benton wrote:Thanks George, I really cant imagine why anyone would want to fly , given a choice of fast frequent trains. Though i guess people may choose to drive , if it is more convienent.

On the ferry the passengers can get off the train and visit the facilities on the boat. The journey is just long enough to get a quick meal.

I only fly when crossing oceans, as to America or Africa. I haven't flown anywhere in Europe for at least 20 years - Cyprus I think, as part of a journey from Africa. Journeys to France or Germany are now very convenient via the Tunnel, my preferred route.

If only we had rail as a usable option in the colonies.

David Benton wrote:If only we had rail as a usable option in the colonies.

NZ needs more people. Then trains would be more profitable. But road traffic without carbon emissions would be possible as you have plenty of non-carbon electricity.

philipmartin wrote:Aren't airplanes for passengers and ships for freight cheaper?

Flying isn't flexible.

ICE tickets from Berlin to Kobenhavn start at around 80 Euro, from Hamburg at around 40 (!) Euro, from Cologne at around 90 Euro, from Frankfurt at around 100 Euro. That's if you want to go tomorrow morning. If I want to get a flight on the same routes tomorrow morning, i'm shelling out at least 250 Euro for any of these destinations.

If I wanted a flight in two weeks, I could probably get one in a similar price range to the railway tickets. From Berlin and Frankfurt at least, Hamburg and Cologne as lesser flight destination both start at around 120 minimum.

And if I really want flexibility? I'm in South Germany in the mid evening, with a travel time of 12+ hours over there.
Going by car, i could be there at around 7 am, spending around 100 Euro on gas plus around 75 for the ferry tomorrow morning (and an extra 20 if I want a guaranteed spot).
Going by aircraft, probably around 8 am, but for at least 300 Euro if I get a ticket at all.
Going by rail, I have six possible connections to Kobenhaven with open seats (or beds in the case of CNL) within the next five hours, with the first one arriving over there before 10 am. And for any train running after about 1 AM tonight there are still some ticket deals for 100-120 Euro available, with a regular price in the region of 180-200 Euro.

DB and Schleswig-Holstein plan new line to reach Fehmarn Belt tunnel - Railway Gazette
It would be Lübeck - Puttgarden

DB Netz says that when the new line is completed, the existing single-track route would be decommissioned, enabling rail traffic to be routed away from the centre of several small towns along the route, including Ratekau, Grossenbrode and Sierksdorf. Nevertheless, the letter incudes a commitment to retain a local passenger service between Lübeck and Puttgarden via the new alignment.

News: NewEurope.EU

Denmark greenlights start of work for underwater tunnel to Germany

Danish MPs have approved the launch of the construction of an 18km underwater tunnel that would connect Denmark with Germany.

Work on the project, known as Fehmarnbelt link, is expected to begin in Denmark at the start of next year and, should construction goes as planned, the tunnel will be operational by mid-2029.
...
It will include an 18-kilometre-long electrified double-track railway and a four-lane motorway, allowing trains to cross the Fehmarn Belt – a strait connecting northern Germany and the Danish island of Lolland – in seven minutes, whereas cars will make the journey in ten minutes.
...
The tunnel will be the longest of its kind globally. On the German side, construction is set to begin by mid-2022.