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

The New Austrian Railways' Intercity and Nightjet Sleeper Train Interior Design

priestmangoode.com

Post reply on HN
Print view View original

61–70 of 215 posts

Re: The New Austrian Railways' Intercity and Nightjet Sleeper Train Interior Design

#61

Post by nikodunk »

dexen wrote: post #52
mschuster91 wrote: post #42

Earlier quoted context omitted.

The joke is that airfare is way too cheap compared to the damage it causes - be it noise, exhaust gases or land usage for airport infrastructure. In addition jet fuel in Europe is tax-free which enables these ultra low prices.

Air travel is comparable in fuel usage to trains [1]. Which surprised me a bit, as I expected much better mileage for the air travel, thanks to the exceptionally low drag of the rarified air up there as compared to wheels on rails. However the railway ought to be more expensive overall due to the other costs: requires build-out and maintenance of extensive ground based network, including some prime real estate; requi…

That's a misleading statement. From your linked article:

"Trains in countries like Japan are predominantly electric and transport a much larger number of people per cabin than trains in the US. While it’s difficult to broadly compare trains between regions it’s safe to say that trains in European and Asian countries are far more fuel efficient than those in the US, making them a leading option for travel.

In most cases outside of the US, trains are probably at least as efficient as buses and are much more efficient than cars and planes."

Yours, Physics.

Re: The New Austrian Railways' Intercity and Nightjet Sleeper Train Interior Design

#62

Post by gomox »

michaelbuckbee wrote: post #44

One high-level design choice that they made is to entirely skip any kind of in-seat entertainment and screens and instead of plan around people showing up with their own tablets and phones (to which they provide power). This makes immense sense to me and I'm sure simplifies things on their side.

I have never seen a train with in seat entertainment (other than looking out the window!). Is that even a thing?

Re: The New Austrian Railways' Intercity and Nightjet Sleeper Train Interior Design

#63

Post by phillc73 »

arethuza wrote: post #29
ganonm wrote: post #2

Sleeper trains make so much sense for travel over land. They are often competitively priced with air travel, they pollute a lot less and the time saved can be huge when you consider that you spend time travelling when you would otherwise be asleep (although this is sometimes true for air travel, many/most people find it difficult to get quality sleep in economy class). The London - Edinburgh sleeper train (Caledonian…

Worth pointing out that the sleepers don't terminate at Edinburgh - they continue further north to Fort William and Inverness - the former being the "Deerstalker": https://www.seat61.com/deerstalker.htm I have chatted (T-bars being quite sociable) to people who had come up for skiing on Cairngorm on the sleeper as well. Edit: Replaced "stop" with "terminate".

I'm pretty sure the Caledonian Sleeper to Fort William does stop at Edinburgh Waverley, just not terminate there.

Re: The New Austrian Railways' Intercity and Nightjet Sleeper Train Interior Design

#64

Post by FabHK »

CaptainZapp wrote: post #27
jschwartzi wrote: post #12

In the US I would take a sleeper train from Seattle to Chicago instead of a plane provided the sleeper train runs 180 mph on average. That would put me in Chicago in about 10-12 hours, meaning I could get to Union Station in Seattle, get on the train, sleep a full night, wake up, eat breakfast, and disembark in Chicago. The red-eye to Chicago, which is a comparable trip, really sucks because you only get about 3 hour…

In the US I would take a sleeper train from Seattle to Chicago instead of a plane provided the sleeper train runs 180 mph on average. Not really doable for a lot of Austria and generally the Alpine regions. There are not many high speed tracks in Austria and Switzerland, the reason being that the countries are relatively small and that building high speed tracks through the alps is insanely expensive. Switzerland bui…

The railway from Beijing via Xining to Lhasa in Tibet passes over the Tanggula Pass at 5,072 m (16,640 feet) above sea level (apparently the world's highest point on a railway) before dropping you at Lhasa at 3,490 m (11,975 feet) [1].

It takes two days at around 100 to 120 km/h over 675 bridges, though some recommend [2] that you spend a day or so in Xining on the way to acclimatise to the altitude.

Every train carries a doctor and oxygen to increase the concentration of oxygen in the carriages from 21% to 25% (but no pressurisation), plus a separate oxygen supply for each passenger.

I'm not a fan of China, but its rail network is something to behold.

[1] https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Qinghai–Tibet_railway

[2] https://www.yowangdu.com/tibet-travel/tibet-train.html

Re: The New Austrian Railways' Intercity and Nightjet Sleeper Train Interior Design

#65

Post by thesimon »

alkonaut wrote: post #41
ido wrote: post #40

Earlier quoted context omitted.

"airfare-level prices"? In Germany and Austria my experience was that flying was generally cheaper than the train, and sleeper trains more expensive still. I'm on a (day) train between Berlin and Vienna this very minute and it costed me €99 (one way!) where as a flight would have been about €50. You can get cheaper tickets if booking well in advance (months) but the same applies to budget airlines.

> where as a flight would have been about €50. To be fair to travel betwee Berlin and Vienna City centres you'd need to add at least a €10 in each end for ground transport.

>To be fair to travel betwee Berlin and Vienna City centres you'd need to add at least a €10 in each end for ground transport.

Vienna should be less than 5€ for the airport + VOR ticket.

Re: The New Austrian Railways' Intercity and Nightjet Sleeper Train Interior Design

#66

Post by rtkwe »

briffle wrote: post #39
jcranmer wrote: post #36

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Note that Montana and North Dakota, which provide most of the mileage of the route, each have just one congressional district.

I guess you are right. But those 7 stops in ND, and 12 in MT, are there really enough people there to justify those stations? Maybe have an 'express' and a regular train?

It's a question of demand really and maybe driven by a chicken and egg problem. Trains are slow and expensive so people prefer to fly leading to a lack of demand to support both a slow every stop train and an express point to point train. Also I imagine prices would increase on an express train compared to current trains because it will be picking up less passengers from those intermediate stations. It's tough to setup a lot of different trains because tracks are afaik one per direction in most locations and lines so you're very harshly limited on the scheduling side of things.

Re: The New Austrian Railways' Intercity and Nightjet Sleeper Train Interior Design

#67

Post by alkonaut »

chrisseaton wrote: post #53
alkonaut wrote: post #48

Earlier quoted context omitted.

The beds are surely at least 2m? What makes it uncomfortable for someone over 160?

Why are they 'surely' at least 2m? The beds on the Caledonian aren't that long. A standard (not King) bed is only 190 cm in most countries. You're not going to get a King-length bed on a train - that's not a reasonable expectation.

Im 180 and never felt a difference in length from my home bed to the sleeper train beds. They may be shorter but not so much that it bothered me. That’s why I assumed they were the same as home beds (standard length in Europe is 200).

Re: The New Austrian Railways' Intercity and Nightjet Sleeper Train Interior Design

#68

Post by MaconBacon »

jschwartzi wrote: post #12

In the US I would take a sleeper train from Seattle to Chicago instead of a plane provided the sleeper train runs 180 mph on average. That would put me in Chicago in about 10-12 hours, meaning I could get to Union Station in Seattle, get on the train, sleep a full night, wake up, eat breakfast, and disembark in Chicago. The red-eye to Chicago, which is a comparable trip, really sucks because you only get about 3 hour…

You would have to pay 1st class airfare level prices for a such a thing, maybe even more.

Re: The New Austrian Railways' Intercity and Nightjet Sleeper Train Interior Design

#69

Post by thesimon »

_ak wrote: post #49
ido wrote: post #40

Earlier quoted context omitted.

"airfare-level prices"? In Germany and Austria my experience was that flying was generally cheaper than the train, and sleeper trains more expensive still. I'm on a (day) train between Berlin and Vienna this very minute and it costed me €99 (one way!) where as a flight would have been about €50. You can get cheaper tickets if booking well in advance (months) but the same applies to budget airlines.

In Germany, jet fuel is untaxed, whereas train companies have to pay tax on electricity, in particular renewable energy. Also, VAT is handled differently: if you buy a flight from Germany to another country, only a portion of what you paid for your plane ticket is taxed at German VAT rate, but for train tickets, 100% of the ticket price is taxed with the German VAT rate. These are several factors that make it quite a…

>These are several factors that make it quite a bit harder for the railway to compete with short-distance flights.

Main factor for journeys within Germany though is the lack of competition for DB. Compare Lufthansa prices on MUC-TXL vs. STR-FMO.

Re: The New Austrian Railways' Intercity and Nightjet Sleeper Train Interior Design

#70

Post by arethuza »

phillc73 wrote: post #63
arethuza wrote: post #29

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Worth pointing out that the sleepers don't terminate at Edinburgh - they continue further north to Fort William and Inverness - the former being the "Deerstalker": https://www.seat61.com/deerstalker.htm I have chatted (T-bars being quite sociable) to people who had come up for skiing on Cairngorm on the sleeper as well. Edit: Replaced "stop" with "terminate".

I'm pretty sure the Caledonian Sleeper to Fort William does stop at Edinburgh Waverley, just not terminate there.

Corrected - I meant "doesn't terminate" rather than "doesn't stop" - I think the train splits somewhere to go its various ways.
Post reply on HN