Hacker News Board Hacker News, browsed like a classic message board
Live data from Hacker News

France’s new high-speed trains

citylab.com

Post reply on HN
Print view View original

81–90 of 239 posts

Re: France’s new high-speed trains

#81

Post by pmontra »

lultimouomo wrote: post #77
adrianN wrote: post #74

Earlier quoted context omitted.

For many connections that are less than 500km or so apart, a train is faster than a plane. A good rail network also connects smaller towns that don't have an airport. It can also be used to transport goods. All these uses would have to be replaced by cars and trucks if you'd only focus on planes, that's not very good for the environment.

Also, a 4 hour travel door-to-door on a plane means: * Half an hour to go to the airport * Half an hour passing security and waiting for boarding * 20 minutes between boarding and stable flight when you can start working on your laptop * One hour and 40 minutes when you can work cramped in a noisy environment with terrible air quality * 15 minutes descent and landing * 15 minutes deboarding and getting out of the air…

> Half an hour passing security and waiting for boarding

Only 30 minutes sounds optimistic. You also didn't count the time to recover luggage. I've seen people bringing huge suitcases on high speed trains. They couldn't take them in cabin on a flight. Planes are good past the 2 hours flight time IMHO, or across countries where there are no interconnected high speed networks (I'm writing this with Europe in mind.)

Re: France’s new high-speed trains

#82

Post by em500 »

oh_sigh wrote: post #57
ucaetano wrote: post #14

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Nope, it is anti-competitive and bad for the economy, as it creates trade barriers and stifles innovation, as well as using your taxes badly. It essentially accounts to government subsidies for a certain company. And that's why it is illegal in the EU.

Bad for the EU economy, but not necessarily bad for the French economy, which is what the French government should primarily be concerned with. If a German train costs 100 units, and an equivalent French train costs 110 units, but buying the French train gives 40 units to your neighbors and coworkers, why shouldn't the French government buy the French train?

They would. Then the German government would do the same for Siemens trains. Then the only thing both sides have gained are more expensive trains. That's why EU rules forbid this.

Re: France’s new high-speed trains

#83

Post by otabdeveloper1 »

supernova87a wrote: post #31

SNCF is fiddling with the wrong things. It doesn't need to separate train operations from rail track network maintenance. It doesn't need to open up the network to competition. What it needs to do is cut the number of excessive public sector workers, reduce costs, and stop running the business like a political arm of the government. I can bet that the reason they think they need to do all these things is that cost pr…

> Public rail is a money-losing venture, in every country (except Hong Kong).

Not in Russia. They had a $2 billion profit in 2017. It's also the third-largest rail company in the world, so yes, it can be done.

Re: France’s new high-speed trains

#84

Post by speedplane »

otabdeveloper1 wrote: post #83
supernova87a wrote: post #31

SNCF is fiddling with the wrong things. It doesn't need to separate train operations from rail track network maintenance. It doesn't need to open up the network to competition. What it needs to do is cut the number of excessive public sector workers, reduce costs, and stop running the business like a political arm of the government. I can bet that the reason they think they need to do all these things is that cost pr…

> Public rail is a money-losing venture, in every country (except Hong Kong). Not in Russia. They had a $2 billion profit in 2017. It's also the third-largest rail company in the world, so yes, it can be done.

Not in Amtrak's Northeast corridor either. If Amtrak was run like a business, it could shut down a number of lines and become a cash-cow. But it decisively not run like a business.

Re: France’s new high-speed trains

#85

Post by solidsnack9000 »

solidsnack9000 wrote: post #49

While high-speed trains are struggling to gain a foothold in some parts of the world (looking at you, California), France’s superfast rail services are looking at a very active, more competitive future. SNCF’s new trains should help it meet the challenge posed by new competitors. Simply called the TGV 2020, these trains offer some clear improvements, as illustrated in the video above. For a start, the train’s shorter…

Getting downvoted for metric advocacy.

Sad.

Re: France’s new high-speed trains

#86

Post by speedplane »

supernova87a wrote: post #31

SNCF is fiddling with the wrong things. It doesn't need to separate train operations from rail track network maintenance. It doesn't need to open up the network to competition. What it needs to do is cut the number of excessive public sector workers, reduce costs, and stop running the business like a political arm of the government. I can bet that the reason they think they need to do all these things is that cost pr…

> Public rail is a money-losing venture, ... But it's important to have. Just how much money-losing depends on the political environment and skill of the management.

Arguably, all public rail should lose money. Quality transportation is a huge economic driver of regional economies. If a rail service is making money, it likely means governments are underinvesting in their own economies.

Re: France’s new high-speed trains

#87

Post by distances »

acchow wrote: post #75
supernova87a wrote: post #31

SNCF is fiddling with the wrong things. It doesn't need to separate train operations from rail track network maintenance. It doesn't need to open up the network to competition. What it needs to do is cut the number of excessive public sector workers, reduce costs, and stop running the business like a political arm of the government. I can bet that the reason they think they need to do all these things is that cost pr…

Hong Kong's is profitable mostly because it is run as a real estate company. They acquire land before adding a metro station and then lease/sell the valuable land after adding the station. Why don't other cities do this?

I think all land within city limits should be publicly acquired with eminent domain before zoning and building of utilities. No reason to let the land value increase fall to private landowners when it's all due to build-up of public services. Better use the profits for maintaining the services.

Re: France’s new high-speed trains

#88

Post by chillacy »

baroffoos wrote: post #64
ams6110 wrote: post #53

Earlier quoted context omitted.

As a writer, one writes for one's audience. It's a US publication, targeting mainly US readers. Using metric units would be less understandable. It's not like the reason high speed rail doesn't work in the US is because we talk about speed in miles per hour.

Its part of the US attitude of ignoring modern engineering

Your Intel chips were probably specced out in mils (milli-inches). All the screws are various fractions of an inch. A surprising amount of "modern engineering" uses imperial still.

Science at least is all metric.

Re: France’s new high-speed trains

#89

Post by tasubotadas »

otabdeveloper1 wrote: post #83
supernova87a wrote: post #31

SNCF is fiddling with the wrong things. It doesn't need to separate train operations from rail track network maintenance. It doesn't need to open up the network to competition. What it needs to do is cut the number of excessive public sector workers, reduce costs, and stop running the business like a political arm of the government. I can bet that the reason they think they need to do all these things is that cost pr…

> Public rail is a money-losing venture, in every country (except Hong Kong). Not in Russia. They had a $2 billion profit in 2017. It's also the third-largest rail company in the world, so yes, it can be done.

How much of that is profit from industrial logistics (read moving oil), and which part of that are revenues from passengers?

Re: France’s new high-speed trains

#90

Post by cosmolev »

otabdeveloper1 wrote: post #83
supernova87a wrote: post #31

SNCF is fiddling with the wrong things. It doesn't need to separate train operations from rail track network maintenance. It doesn't need to open up the network to competition. What it needs to do is cut the number of excessive public sector workers, reduce costs, and stop running the business like a political arm of the government. I can bet that the reason they think they need to do all these things is that cost pr…

> Public rail is a money-losing venture, in every country (except Hong Kong). Not in Russia. They had a $2 billion profit in 2017. It's also the third-largest rail company in the world, so yes, it can be done.

All this profit comes from freight operations. Passenger services are loss making.
Post reply on HN