[CH][I] grensperikelen Chiasso / Como

Moderator: Moderatoren

Pino
2x5 autosnelweg
Berichten: 19539
Lid geworden op: ma 28 feb 2005, 9:17
Locatie: Sesamstraat

[CH][I] grensperikelen Chiasso / Como

Bericht door Pino » ma 16 jul 2012, 8:44

Coccodrillo schreef:Yesterday there were around 8 km queue southbound at the Swiss-Italian border on A2 - more or less the same than before the Tunnel, so even if it were 2x2 probably the queue at the border would have been longer.
I wonder what the exact impact would be. It is a standard argument in the context of proposed widenings that the very same queue will simply move to the next bottleneck, but practice has shown a much more diverse picture. At the very least, the AADT levels around Chiasso are very much different when compared to the Gotthard, which means that the situation at Brogeda might not suffer an awful lot from a Gotthard widening. The vast majority of the traffic there has only joined the A2 somewhere in the Sottoceneri. Also, the gap of more than 100 kilometers between the Gotthard and Chiasso suggests that the drip-feeding effect of the Gotthard is more or less gone anyway once traffic hits the Chiasso area. Motorists have been taking breaks, some drive faster than others, etc.

Anyway, are there any plans to change the facility at Chiasso-Brogeda? I know that the terrain there does not leave an awful lot of room to extend the facilities, but with the perennial queues there (it's not a holiday season thing), you'd have to start thinking creatively. Maybe a whole new stretch of motorway to the West? Doing so would also eliminate the rather substandard passage of the A9 through Como. Or is there an anticipation that border controls will be lifted in the near future, before any new project could be finalised?

Coccodrillo
stadsweg
Berichten: 268
Lid geworden op: di 25 jan 2011, 13:11
Locatie: Zwitserland

Re: Gotthardtunnel

Bericht door Coccodrillo » ma 16 jul 2012, 10:32

Anyway, are there any plans to change the facility at Chiasso-Brogeda?
No. Out of a dozen of lanes, usually only one for cars and one for buses and empty trucks in open, and very rarely a second one for cars (per direction). I have never seen more than two car lanes here, even if I don't use this crossing on peak days.
Or is there an anticipation that border controls will be lifted in the near future, before any new project could be finalised?
I don't think so, even if now often custom officers just wave car drivers to pass (often even without looking at them).
für Güter die Bahn
pour vos marchandises le rail
chi dice merci dice ferrovia

Pino
2x5 autosnelweg
Berichten: 19539
Lid geworden op: ma 28 feb 2005, 9:17
Locatie: Sesamstraat

Re: Gotthardtunnel

Bericht door Pino » ma 16 jul 2012, 11:46

Coccodrillo schreef:Out of a dozen of lanes, usually only one for cars and one for buses and empty trucks in open, and very rarely a second one for cars (per direction).
Good point. If you had a border crossing in Western Europe in the pre-Schengen days, it would normally have two lanes plus additional facilities for busses and trucks. Chiasso goes down to one. In addition, those motorway customs facilities of old would look like a modern day toll booth. You would simply slow done to something like 15 km/h past customs and then it was full speed ahead again. Even Weil am Rhein is configured like that. But at Brogeda you have to make rather sharp turns. Probably ideal to generate eye contact between customs officer and motorist, but not ideal for a speedy passage. And accordingly, even on days where customs waive you through, there will be more of a delay than at other motorway border crossings.

But then I wonder, too, about the bottleneck that is at the Italian side of the border when arriving out of Switzerland. All lanes merge into one within 25 meters after the border (for reference, this is the Google Maps view). If they increased the number of cars passing through, wouldn't that generate a traffic jam at that lane merge? Shouldn't they move all buildings that are presently on the site to the side and then streamline the twelve lanes available on the spot?

Coccodrillo
stadsweg
Berichten: 268
Lid geworden op: di 25 jan 2011, 13:11
Locatie: Zwitserland

Re: Gotthardtunnel

Bericht door Coccodrillo » ma 16 jul 2012, 12:23

Shouldn't they move all buildings that are presently on the site to the side and then streamline the twelve lanes available on the spot?
I don't understand what you are proposing - but certainly the point where the two lane from the custom and the two from Como merge should be improved.
At the very least, the AADT levels around Chiasso are very much different when compared to the Gotthard, which means that the situation at Brogeda might not suffer an awful lot from a Gotthard widening.
But when there is no queue on the Gotthard the queue at the border is much lower (1-2 km?), despite the great number of commuters.
für Güter die Bahn
pour vos marchandises le rail
chi dice merci dice ferrovia

waldo79
2x5 autosnelweg
Berichten: 19307
Lid geworden op: do 05 mei 2005, 10:28
Locatie: 's-Hertogenbosch

Re: Gotthardtunnel

Bericht door waldo79 » ma 16 jul 2012, 13:26

Coccodrillo schreef:
Shouldn't they move all buildings that are presently on the site to the side and then streamline the twelve lanes available on the spot?
I don't understand what you are proposing - but certainly the point where the two lane from the custom and the two from Como merge should be improved.
Pino suggests that the existing buildings should be moved sidewards. Those buildings can be seen as obstacles in managing the actual traffic volume.

Gebruikersavatar
Coen Tunnel
Voorzitter
Berichten: 30514
Lid geworden op: di 26 apr 2005, 11:39
Locatie: Aan de 🅰2️⃣8️⃣

Re: Gotthardtunnel

Bericht door Coen Tunnel » ma 16 jul 2012, 13:48

I think there is also a problem right after the Brogeda border crossing, when the two lanes separate in one lane for Como Nord and only one (!) lane for through traffic to Milan. The existing buildings at the border crossing can be demolished to increase capacity and traffic speed, but as long as there aren't two lanes for through traffic to Milan, I think it won't help much.
Deze gebruikers waarderen Coen Tunnel voor dit bericht:
Coen Tunnel

waldo79
2x5 autosnelweg
Berichten: 19307
Lid geworden op: do 05 mei 2005, 10:28
Locatie: 's-Hertogenbosch

Re: Gotthardtunnel

Bericht door waldo79 » ma 16 jul 2012, 13:54

You mean south bound. I thought we were discussing north bound (in direction Lugano/Gotthard) ;)

Pino
2x5 autosnelweg
Berichten: 19539
Lid geworden op: ma 28 feb 2005, 9:17
Locatie: Sesamstraat

Re: Gotthardtunnel

Bericht door Pino » ma 16 jul 2012, 15:45

I think the problem goes into two directions. In fact, Italy-bound delays stand out during the holiday season, but in my experience the waiting times on normal days tend to be longer Switzerland-bound. Travelling Northbound, I have taken my favorite detour through Chiasso more often than the Brogeda crossing due to queues at the border. Travelling Southbound, the situation was normally well under control.

Essentially, I was asking myself: what might be the reason that Chiasso-Brogeda generally operates at 1+1 for ordinary vehicles, where 2+2 is much more of the rule in Switzerland (and was the rule in pre-Schengen Western Europe)? In each direction, Brogeda operates at one lane for ordinary vehicles and one lane for buses and empty trucks. Loaded trucks are diverted to a separate area and do not really affect the space at the crossing as you experience it from ordinary cars. So why is that? I feel that the configuration on the Italian side plays a role there. First of all, you face those buildings at the Italian side, which cause that there can be only one lane for ordinary vehicles. Unless you remove the separate facility for buses and empty trucks, but I guess that is not really an option for logistical reasons. And then after that, there is the Como Nord exit / entry complex (which is also where loaded trucks re-join the A9) immediately followed by a tunnel. In the present situation, there is little else that you can do but to reduce traffic out of Switzerland to one lane.

So that is why I think that a complete reconstruction on the Italian side might be due. The easy part would be formed by that restaurant right in the middle. Completely removing it would be the easiest option to create a 2+2 crossing for ordinary vehicles, but I think that turning it by 90 degrees would already do the trick. And then there is Como Nord. They should either broaden the tunnel to 3+2 (extra lane in the direction of Milan, to permit a proper merger out of Como and by loaded trucks) or should change its configuration by different means.
But when there is no queue on the Gotthard the queue at the border is much lower (1-2 km?), despite the great number of commuters.
Of course the queues are much longer on days where there are also large queues before the Gotthard. That doesn't have anything to do with commuters, as they tend to pass at different times in the first place, but with the large demand created by tourists. But what I was trying to say is that there there is a distance of over 100 kilometers between Airolo and Chiasso, during which traffic that drip-fed out of the tunnel will reclutter.

Let's say that one car emerges out of the tunnel every 3 seconds. Our of the 20 cars that emerge at Airolo in any given minute, maybe 18 go on to Chiasso. But they will not arrive there in the same minute and in the same sequence as they left the tunnel. On the contrary. Because motorists drive at different speeds, take breaks etc., you may very well cross the border at Chiasso just before someone who did the tunnel half an hour after you. In other words, the bottleneck effect of the tunnel is pretty much undone by the time that you arrive at Chiasso.

Past experience with removing bottlenecks shows that a queue "saved" by a duplication will not automatically re-appear at the next bottleneck. The queues at the Tauern have not simply moved to the Karawanken Tunnel. A Gotthard duplication will probably add some pressure at Chiasso, but not in the sense that a 5km queue "saved" at the Gotthard gets automatically added to an existing queue at Chiasso.
Laatst gewijzigd door Pino op ma 16 jul 2012, 17:56, 1 keer totaal gewijzigd.

waldo79
2x5 autosnelweg
Berichten: 19307
Lid geworden op: do 05 mei 2005, 10:28
Locatie: 's-Hertogenbosch

Re: Gotthardtunnel

Bericht door waldo79 » ma 16 jul 2012, 15:53

They should either broaden the tunnel to 3+2 (extra lane in the direction of Milan, to permit a proper merger out of Como and by loaded trucks) or should change its configuration by different means.
Would it be possible to easily broaden the tunnel because of the mountainous conditions :?:

waldo79
2x5 autosnelweg
Berichten: 19307
Lid geworden op: do 05 mei 2005, 10:28
Locatie: 's-Hertogenbosch

Re: Gotthardtunnel

Bericht door waldo79 » ma 16 jul 2012, 16:05

Is het niet handiger om deze discussie af te splitsen naar zoiets als [CH] Grensovergang Chiasso - Brogeda?
(Wouldn't be more effective in diverting this discussion)

Pino
2x5 autosnelweg
Berichten: 19539
Lid geworden op: ma 28 feb 2005, 9:17
Locatie: Sesamstraat

Re: Gotthardtunnel

Bericht door Pino » ma 16 jul 2012, 16:17

Would it be possible to easily broaden the tunnel because of the mountainous conditions.
As far as I am aware, no project to this effect has ever been suggested, so probably there have not been any feasibility studies in connection with such a widening. And supposedly there are no geologists with knowledge of the local conditions active on this forum ...

Gebruikersavatar
Chris
Moderator
Berichten: 69568
Lid geworden op: zo 27 feb 2005, 15:19
Locatie: NL

Re: Gotthardtunnel

Bericht door Chris » ma 16 jul 2012, 16:22

Ik heb dit wel eens voorgesteld (2x3). Dit is behalve voor het verkeer ook voor Chiasso en Como een ontlasting van files, geluid en sluipverkeer. Ik stoor me nogal aan het totale gebrek aan ambitie in Zwitserland om echte knelpunten op te lossen. In plaats van zoiets als dit en de tweede Gotthardtunnel bouwen ze een A16 door een leeg gebied met zo goed als geen verkeersproblemen.

Afbeelding

Pino
2x5 autosnelweg
Berichten: 19539
Lid geworden op: ma 28 feb 2005, 9:17
Locatie: Sesamstraat

Re: Gotthardtunnel

Bericht door Pino » ma 16 jul 2012, 16:44

In een confederaal georganiseerd land als Zwitserland bevindt Chiasso zich teveel aan de rand om echt de politieke gemoederen te beheersen. Je merkt dat zelfs al aan de discussie over de Gotthard, die ook maar nauwelijks de prioriteit krijgt die het verdient. Uri en Ticino zijn echt jarenlang bezig geweest om het onderwerp zijn huidige status op de agenda te geven. Waarvan we allemaal weten dat die niet al te hoog is.

Verder ben ik het natuurlijk helemaal met je eens als het gaat om een gebrek aan ambitie in Zwitserland. Kan daar alleen maar twee kanttekeningen bij plaatsen. Als eerste dat ik de problemen bij Chiasso eigenlijk vooral als een probleem aan de Italiaanse kant zie. Dáár ligt een onmogelijke kruip-door-sluip-doorroute die de capaciteit van de grensovergang reduceert. Aan de Zwitserse kant ziet alles eruit zoals het hoort. Het zou daarom dus ook aan de Italianen moeten zijn om geld uit te trekken voor een andere route om Como / Chiasso heen en Italië zou daarbij Zwitserland voor een aanzienlijk deel moeten uitnemen voor de kosten voor de laatste kilometer over Zwitsers gebied (vergelijk het met de verdragen tussen Nederland en Duitsland met betrekking tot de A74 of die tussen Nederland en België met betrekking tot andere grensoverschrijdende infra). Kun je het dan de Zwitsers verwijten dat de Italianen de zaken hun beloop laten? En daarnaast: we hebben in Nederland ook net 25 jaar achter de rug waarin echte nieuwe infrastructuur gewoon niet van de grond kwam. Ik zou menen dat we de wat gunstiger politieke wind niet meteen kunnen gebruiken om daar nu anderen enorm de maat mee te nemen.
Laatst gewijzigd door Pino op ma 16 jul 2012, 20:30, 1 keer totaal gewijzigd.

Gebruikersavatar
Jeroen
2x2 autosnelweg
Berichten: 6289
Lid geworden op: do 23 jun 2005, 17:27
Locatie: Ergens op de rechterrijstrook

Re: Gotthardtunnel

Bericht door Jeroen » ma 16 jul 2012, 17:53

Pino schreef:Dáár ligt een onmogelijke kruip-door-sluip-doorroute die de capaciteit van de grensovergang reduceert.
De files ontstaan toch feitelijk door de douane zelf en niet door het voorafgaande substandaard stuk autostrada, lijkt mij. Ik ken er het fijne niet van, maar waarom voert Zwitserland ook ná toevoeging bij Schengen nog steeds permanente controles op personenverkeer? Goed, niet iedereen wordt aangehouden, maar je rijdt nog steeds een fuik in wat gewoon file oplevert. Aan de grens CH/I lijken de vertragingen ook groter te zijn dan de grens CH/D voor personenverkeer, voor wat ik daarvan kan zien. Voor het vrachtverkeer is dit overigens precies andersom.

Gebruikersavatar
Chris
Moderator
Berichten: 69568
Lid geworden op: zo 27 feb 2005, 15:19
Locatie: NL

Re: Gotthardtunnel

Bericht door Chris » ma 16 jul 2012, 18:02

Jeroen schreef:Aan de grens CH/I lijken de vertragingen ook groter te zijn dan de grens CH/D voor personenverkeer, voor wat ik daarvan kan zien.
Klopt, bij Weil am Rhein/Basel wordt eigenlijk nooit vertraging voor autoverkeer gemeld en anders kan je nog via de A98-A861 richting Bern/Luzern/Zürich.

Groningen
expressweg
Berichten: 3784
Lid geworden op: vr 03 sep 2010, 13:22
Locatie: Zwolle

Re: Gotthardtunnel

Bericht door Groningen » ma 16 jul 2012, 18:04

^^ Schijnt vooral te zijn om afval'export' van CH naar I te voorkomen (het is in I goedkoper om vuil weg te brengen).

Pino
2x5 autosnelweg
Berichten: 19539
Lid geworden op: ma 28 feb 2005, 9:17
Locatie: Sesamstraat

Re: Gotthardtunnel

Bericht door Pino » ma 16 jul 2012, 18:15

Als hierboven besproken, Basel/Weil am Rhein en de meeste andere snelweg-grensovergangen hebben 2 banen per richting voor het personenverkeer. Chiasso-Brogeda maar één. Met een capaciteit die 50% lager is dan die bij Weil am Rhein (waarbij ik dan nog niet eens praat over de twee alternatieven die bij Basel voorhanden zijn, namelijk via de Franse A35 en de Duitse A98) is het niet zo gek dat Chiasso-Brogeda er in alle fileberichten uit springt. Vandaar dat ik ook de vraag op wierp hoe het kan dat Chiasso-Brogeda op die lage capaciteit draait. Het kan toch niet zo zijn dat dat puur ligt aan het feit dat de beide betrokken landen geen zin hebben om meer douaniers in te zetten. En misschien zit ik helemaal mis hoor, maar mijn vermoeden is dat ze de capaciteit niet kunnen verhogen vanwege ruimtegebrek aan de Italiaanse kant. Richting Milaan zou je vlak achter de grens een bottleneck krijgen, richting Zwitserland ontbreekt het aan een derde rijbaan naar de grens toe.

De vraag waarom Zwitserland toch nog controles doorvoert in het Schengen-tijdperk is al vaker ter sprake gekomen. Kort en goed, er geldt wel vrijheid van personenverkeer, maar niet van goederenverkeer. En dus is smokkel mogelijk, die even makkelijk via personenauto's kan plaatsvinden als via vrachtauto's.
Laatst gewijzigd door Pino op ma 16 jul 2012, 18:27, 1 keer totaal gewijzigd.

Gebruikersavatar
Jeroen
2x2 autosnelweg
Berichten: 6289
Lid geworden op: do 23 jun 2005, 17:27
Locatie: Ergens op de rechterrijstrook

Re: Gotthardtunnel

Bericht door Jeroen » ma 16 jul 2012, 18:19

Groningen schreef:^^ Schijnt vooral te zijn om afval'export' van CH naar I te voorkomen (het is in I goedkoper om vuil weg te brengen).
Vind je het gek, het wordt op veel plekken gewoon langs de weg gedumpt. :rofl2:

Ik stond er in het begin ook van te kijken waarom er bij de meeste pechhavens bijvoorbeeld een bordje bijhangt met 'divieto scaricare di rifuti' ...

Gebruikersavatar
Vinny
4x5 autosnelweg
Berichten: 39733
Lid geworden op: zo 27 feb 2005, 12:52
Locatie: Friesland

Re: Gotthardtunnel

Bericht door Vinny » ma 16 jul 2012, 19:02

waldo79 schreef:Is het niet handiger om deze discussie af te splitsen naar zoiets als [CH] Grensovergang Chiasso - Brogeda?
(Wouldn't be more effective in diverting this discussion)
There are many interesting viewpoints in this thread, which could be discussed in the general Switzerland topic or Italian topic too. But as the discussion is related to the traffic problem at the Gotthardtunnel, i would be in favour of leaving it here. There are a few comments i want to made about earlier statements:
1. The lack of ambition of the Swiss gouvernement:
I would underline the fact that the outcome of the political debate simply is that the Swiss people doesn't want a second tunnel, implemented in a law which basically prohibits the enlargement of trans-alpine routes (for trucks and cars). In contrary, the majority of the public (71%!) have been supported the extension of the Motorway A 16, as it has been subject to a public vote in 1982 (http://fr.wikipedia.org/wiki/Autoroute_suisse_A16). So the only way of getting the second Gotthardtunnel back on the political agenda is to persuade some key political figures and to gain public interest for this project. In a democracy, the rule of the majority counts.
2. The Italian border problem:
I would stress the fact that opening a border creates oppertunities for unwanted ex/import or migration (drugs, people trading etc.). It's a side effect which is actually a strong issue in Switzerland and apparently also in Italy, which is being confronted with illegal waste deposits. There is no easy solution for it, since the effect of removing the barriers and border procedures would be immedeatly followed by a rise in criminal activity.
3. The lack of a well-built autostrada at the Italian side of the border:
This might be the most easiest thing to do: simply reconfigure the existing road in a proper motorway, and which some small "quick wins" the capacity of the border and the road can be slightly improved. But I guess the overall gain of traveltime should not be overestimated. In Dutch we say, it's a drop on a boiling platform ;)
Let op: Sarcasmemodus over een lengte van 10 kilometer.

Pino
2x5 autosnelweg
Berichten: 19539
Lid geworden op: ma 28 feb 2005, 9:17
Locatie: Sesamstraat

Re: Gotthardtunnel

Bericht door Pino » ma 16 jul 2012, 19:17

Vinny schreef:This might be the easiest thing to do: simply reconfigure the existing road into a proper motorway, and which some small "quick wins" the capacity of the border and the road can be slightly improved. But I guess the overall gain of traveltime should not be overestimated.
There is substantial everyday traffic between Ticino and the Como / Milan region. Might be for work, might be for shopping, anything within the ordinary. Travel time between Milan and Lugano should be within the hour. If you need to count on delays of 20 minutes or more on any weekday (which is pretty normal), you are looking at a 33% delay to your trip that might be eliminated through a reconstruction. On peak days, the queues before the border lead to delays in excess of 1.30h. That may not equate to 33% of an uncongested trip, but it remains substantial in any trip between Northern Europe and Italy.

As I mentioned this crossing should have two lanes in each direction for ordinary traffic as opposed to one in the present situation. If that's what can be achieved with the streamlining work on the Italian side, the gain is not "slight", it'd be a duplication of capacity.

With respect to a split-off of this discussion, I don't really mind whether this border crossing gets its own topic or not. But the discussion is now part of a thread opened for trip advices, for which I believe that it is off topic.
Laatst gewijzigd door Pino op ma 16 jul 2012, 20:15, 1 keer totaal gewijzigd.

Gebruikersavatar
Vinny
4x5 autosnelweg
Berichten: 39733
Lid geworden op: zo 27 feb 2005, 12:52
Locatie: Friesland

Re: [CH][I] grensperikelen Chiasso / Como

Bericht door Vinny » ma 16 jul 2012, 19:24

I guess i wasn't too precise in my post. As long as nothing is done about the border procedure, the improvement of the road won't have a big impact on the delay's at the specific point. For regional commuting (trip advise ;)) the train would be a good alternative as well, as there is a direct EC connection between Zürich, Tichino and Milan.
Let op: Sarcasmemodus over een lengte van 10 kilometer.

Pino
2x5 autosnelweg
Berichten: 19539
Lid geworden op: ma 28 feb 2005, 9:17
Locatie: Sesamstraat

Re: [CH][I] grensperikelen Chiasso / Como

Bericht door Pino » ma 16 jul 2012, 19:41

Vinny schreef:I guess i wasn't too precise in my post. As long as nothing is done about the border procedure, the improvement of the road won't have a big impact on the delays at the specific point.
The border procedure is of course key. But on the assumption that the procedure is pretty much the same at each motorway border crossing in Switzerland, a duplication of the capacity to handle ordinary vehicles should reduce waiting times to pretty much the level of Weil am Rhein. In other words, generally nothing substantial.The main question accordingly is whether my main presumption is correct: is the alignment of the Italian A9 immediately south of the border indeed the main reason why Brogeda operates at single lanes only when it comes to ordinary vehicles?
For regional commuting (trip advice ;)) the train would be a good alternative as well, as there is a direct EC connection between Zürich, Ticino and Milan.
The train connections are no more (and no less) convenient than for intercity traffic between any two towns. Quite convenient for some purposes, less convenient for others. You'll have to take for granted that there is many regional traffic passing Brogeda. Of course one may say "they should all take the train and the traffic jams will be gone." It's been the Swiss (and Dutch) approach to many bottlenecks to say that. But is that a realistic approach? Well, probably as realistic as it is at any other bottleneck.
Laatst gewijzigd door Pino op ma 16 jul 2012, 20:05, 1 keer totaal gewijzigd.

Coccodrillo
stadsweg
Berichten: 268
Lid geworden op: di 25 jan 2011, 13:11
Locatie: Zwitserland

Re: [CH][I] grensperikelen Chiasso / Como

Bericht door Coccodrillo » ma 16 jul 2012, 19:45

Of course one may say "they should all take the train and the traffic jams will be gone." It's been the Swiss approach to many bottlenecks to say that. But is that a realistic approach?
Train isn't an alternative for trips to Italy, as they only run every two hours, with delays of 20 to 40 minutes on 75% of trains (some have even a 40 minutes delay nearly daily, when arriving in Zürich from Milan), and with often a mandatory change of train in Chiasso. The railway is far better for Swiss national trips - an that can be seen on statistics (or just taking a train).
für Güter die Bahn
pour vos marchandises le rail
chi dice merci dice ferrovia

Gebruikersavatar
Vinny
4x5 autosnelweg
Berichten: 39733
Lid geworden op: zo 27 feb 2005, 12:52
Locatie: Friesland

Re: [CH][I] grensperikelen Chiasso / Como

Bericht door Vinny » ma 16 jul 2012, 20:30

with delays of 20 to 40 minutes on 75% of trains (
:( I thought the Swiss Railways where known of their ability to run trains on time. My experience is not facing any delays on my trips to Tichino, but off course i didn't go often enough to get the weakness of this connection. BTW, for commuting frequency is not very important. There are trains running only once a day from a certain town to e.g. Zürich, especially for commuters. And in the afternoon it's running back so people can also go home ;)
The main question accordingly is whether my main presumption is correct: is the alignment of the Italian A9 immediately south of the border indeed the main reason why Brogeda operates at single lanes only when it comes to ordinary vehicles?
A quick look at Google Maps shows this:
http://maps.google.ch/maps?q=45.840823, ... 1&t=h&z=19

In fact, the A 9 southbound is indeed reduced to one lane, apperantly to ensure a safe entrance to the Galleria Monte Quanchino. But it's also visible that the traffic is waiting for the border post, not for this tunnel-entrance. Therefore is my conclusion: if nothing is been done to improve the speed and efficenciy of the border control procedure, any improvement of the A 9 fails to contribute to road capacity...
Let op: Sarcasmemodus over een lengte van 10 kilometer.

Pino
2x5 autosnelweg
Berichten: 19539
Lid geworden op: ma 28 feb 2005, 9:17
Locatie: Sesamstraat

Re: [CH][I] grensperikelen Chiasso / Como

Bericht door Pino » ma 16 jul 2012, 23:06

^^ What you see in that picture is that there is only one dedicated lane per direction for ordinary traffic. Whereas two seems to be the norm on other motorways. So why do you believe that the current procedure differs from what is common elsewhere? I've given you my guess that the situation at the Italian end has caused that the customs procedure is like it presently is. If my guess is true, it's not really the customs procedure that creates the queues, but the Italian situation that caused the present customs procedure.

Mind you, over 4 million cars enter Switzerland here every year. They are not operating that at 1 lane per direction for the sake of it. Though I will happily take your thoughts for the real reason why this crossing operates as it does.

Gebruikersavatar
Vinny
4x5 autosnelweg
Berichten: 39733
Lid geworden op: zo 27 feb 2005, 12:52
Locatie: Friesland

Re: [CH][I] grensperikelen Chiasso / Como

Bericht door Vinny » ma 16 jul 2012, 23:14

The border control complex doesn't differentiate with the one in Rekkem (France/Belgium) in the E 17:
https://maps.google.nl/maps?q=50.765894 ... 1&t=h&z=17
Three main lanes in each direction.

The problem (as shown) is the configuration of the motorway-exit, but it doesnt create the traffic jams. They are already gone at that point.
Let op: Sarcasmemodus over een lengte van 10 kilometer.

Gebruikersavatar
Coen Tunnel
Voorzitter
Berichten: 30514
Lid geworden op: di 26 apr 2005, 11:39
Locatie: Aan de 🅰2️⃣8️⃣

Re: [CH][I] grensperikelen Chiasso / Como

Bericht door Coen Tunnel » di 17 jul 2012, 10:03

Vinny schreef:I guess i wasn't too precise in my post. As long as nothing is done about the border procedure, the improvement of the road won't have a big impact on the delay's at the specific point. For regional commuting (trip advise ;)) the train would be a good alternative as well, as there is a direct EC connection between Zürich, Tichino and Milan.
Train traffic in the Ticino-Lombardia border region has improved a lot over the last years with the introduction of the TiLo network. Frequencies were increased and new direct connections were introduced with a new fleet of modern trains. A few years ago, there was only one Swiss EC train every two hours between Bellinzona, Lugano, Chiasso, Como and Milan, and one old Italian regional train every hour between Chiasso and Milan, calling at every station. So yes, the train is a good alternative now, but of course this isn't the solution for the problems at the Brogeda border crossing.
Vinny schreef:
with delays of 20 to 40 minutes on 75% of trains (
:( I thought the Swiss Railways where known of their ability to run trains on time.
The Swiss Railways are, but the EC trains between Zurich and Milan are notorious for their big delays. The problem is mainly caused by problems with the ETR 470 trains (former Cisalpino trains); these trains have always been quite unreliable, already since they've been introduced in the 90's. In Germany and in the Deutschschweiz, the trains were also called Scheissalpino because of the unreliability. They were introduced on the Gotthard route Zurich-Milan only a few years ago replacing the EC services Basel-Milan and with the tilting technology, travelling speed should be increased compared with the loco-hauled classic trains which operated on the Gotthard route before. But when the tilting technology can't be used, the trains are delayed easily. The trains then arrives too late in Zurich or Milan, and is too late for the return journey, so one problem follows another. A year or two ago, there were so many ETR 470 trainsets with malfunctions that some trains had to be replaced by loco-hauled classic trains, increasing the travelling time from Zurich to Milan with almost half an hour.
In fact, the A 9 southbound is indeed reduced to one lane, apperantly to ensure a safe entrance to the Galleria Monte Quanchino. But it's also visible that the traffic is waiting for the border post, not for this tunnel-entrance. Therefore is my conclusion: if nothing is been done to improve the speed and efficenciy of the border control procedure, any improvement of the A 9 fails to contribute to road capacity...
If the border crossing will be improved, the A9 will be the problem. Now there is only one lane for passenger vehichles at the border crossing, so the one lane at the A9 to Milan some few hundred metres later isn't really a big issue. When two lanes at the border crossing become availbale, without sharp turns to allow higher speeds, the junction at Como Nord will be the place where the road capacity of the through motorway will be reduced.
Vinny schreef:The problem (as shown) is the configuration of the motorway-exit, but it doesnt create the traffic jams. They are already gone at that point.
Because the A9 is effectively already reduced to one lane before the Brogeda border crossing. There is only one lane available at the border crossing, so traffic jams can be expected at the border crossing and not beyond the border crossing.
Deze gebruikers waarderen Coen Tunnel voor dit bericht:
Coen Tunnel

Coccodrillo
stadsweg
Berichten: 268
Lid geworden op: di 25 jan 2011, 13:11
Locatie: Zwitserland

Re: [CH][I] grensperikelen Chiasso / Como

Bericht door Coccodrillo » di 17 jul 2012, 10:30

OT :oops: but still regarding international traffic in Chiasso
Coen Tunnel schreef:Train traffic in the Ticino-Lombardia border region has improved a lot over the last years with the introduction of the TiLo network. Frequencies were increased and new direct connections were introduced with a new fleet of modern trains. A few years ago, there was only one Swiss EC train every two hours between Bellinzona, Lugano, Chiasso, Como and Milan, and one old Italian regional train every hour between Chiasso and Milan, calling at every station. So yes, the train is a good alternative now, but of course this isn't the solution for the problems at the Brogeda border crossing.
Zürich-Lugano-Milano trains ran every 60 minutes until December 2008, then frequency dropped to one every 120 minutes with three extra trains at peak hours and a gap of 4 hours without trains. Regularity is nearly absent, see http://www.cessoalpino.com/en/statistics/ :arrow: Stats per Train :arrow: EC 16 for an example (don't consider June as it's when the railway was closed because of a landslide and all trains were cancelled and renumbered). Most of TILO trains are Bellinzona-Lugano-Chiasso-Como local trains stopping everywhere, only three a day go to Milan. That's why I avoid the train to go to Italy as much as possible (but I use it almost every time I go to Deutschschweiz or Romandie).

As for the ETR 470, the 4 sets operated by the SBB run daily, while of the 5 sets owned by Trenitalia, 3 are stored doing nothing since months, and only 2 run from time to time (and mostly only between Milan and Chiasso, as one of the two cannot run in Switzerland anymore for some technical faults).
für Güter die Bahn
pour vos marchandises le rail
chi dice merci dice ferrovia

Pino
2x5 autosnelweg
Berichten: 19539
Lid geworden op: ma 28 feb 2005, 9:17
Locatie: Sesamstraat

Re: [CH][I] grensperikelen Chiasso / Como

Bericht door Pino » di 17 jul 2012, 10:54

Coen Tunnel schreef:There is only one lane available at the border crossing, so traffic jams can be expected at the border crossing and not beyond the border crossing.
Still, Vinny makes a fair point where he points at Rekkem. That is also a busy border crossing and it seems to operate well at only one lane per direction for ordinary vehicles. So maybe the single lane is not the key issue here as I suspected, but something in what Vinny calls the "procedure".

In any event, if traffic is just being waived through, the situation at Rekkem is such that you can pass at something like 30 to 40 km/h, and then it's full speed ahead. The very configuration of Brogeda renders that impossible. You need to make turns for which purpose you have to go back to something like 10 km/h. And you can't go back to 100 km/h right away after having passed the customs officer, because of the turns around the restaurant. That in itself creates more of a delay for passing traffic, thus more of a bottleneck effect. Might a reconfiguration of the border crossing lane be enough to eliminate a substantial part of the queues at Brogeda? In other words, by simply creating a straight line as you see elsewhere?

Gebruikersavatar
Coen Tunnel
Voorzitter
Berichten: 30514
Lid geworden op: di 26 apr 2005, 11:39
Locatie: Aan de 🅰2️⃣8️⃣

Re: [CH][I] grensperikelen Chiasso / Como

Bericht door Coen Tunnel » di 17 jul 2012, 11:57

^^ It could be the configuration is the problem. For example, in Saint-Louis (French A35), there are sharp turns because the through motorway is always closed so the traffic has to pass the border control, and usually only one lane is available, but right after border control the motorway continues in a straight line. Streetview. All the times I've passed this border crossing, there were no delays, although I don't know if delays occur during peak times.
Deze gebruikers waarderen Coen Tunnel voor dit bericht:
Coen Tunnel