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

151–160 of 215 posts

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

#151

Post by sologoub »

vkou wrote: post #145
jermaustin1 wrote: post #139

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Same here, I've taken the London to Edinburgh on LNER and Virgin East Coast multiple times and it runs about £40 each way. And my 30 mile train into Manhattan is $14 $36 one way for a 5 hour train seems pretty cheap.

The problem is that the train has to compete with 3 hours by car... And then the ability to actually use a car at your destination. The transit systems in either Seattle, or Portland, are nowhere near as good as they are in New York.

If you factor in wear and tear, parking, etc. It’s probably still cheap.

You can also rent a car when you get there for something like the same amount for the day and not worry about the wear and tear part.

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

#152

Post by distances »

oracle2025 wrote: post #149
distances wrote: post #14

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Then problem of price still remains before wide popularity for sleepers or even just long daytrips. I'd love to use trains more often, but I'm not willing to pay through the nose. A trip in Central Europe I recently booked would've been over twice the price with a train, with maybe a couple of hours longer travel time when accounting for airport trips and waiting. Second class, just a daytime journey without sleeping…

I take plenty of trains in Europe, and booking well in advance, I never pay the "full" fare. It is usually quite easy to take advantage of early booking offers.

This booking was half a year before the travel date. It would've been cheaper than full price but flights, too, had the early booking advantage.

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

#153

Post by ant6n »

bluGill wrote: post #131
ceejayoz wrote: post #116

Earlier quoted context omitted.

> A one way train ticket for that route is $36. The same trip via car takes about the same amount of time and $20 in gas. Don't forget wear and tear on the car, though. The IRS sets mileage at 58 cents/mile. That's $100 for Seattle to Portland.

Most of the costs of a car are fixed once you own it. Wear and tears per mile is actually small. Insurance is the same for a car driven 7000 miles a year as one driven 30,000. there is a small discount for less than 7000 miles/year, but it is still fixed. Likewise the car payment doesn't change at all. The IRS has to come up with a fair number that translates all those fixed costs into per/mile. It is a good financia…

The trick would be not to own a car with its high fixed costs, and suddenly the train will be cheap.

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

#154

Post by buckminster »

arien wrote: post #17
Freak_NL wrote: post #9

Earlier quoted context omitted.

The Caledonian Express is definitely on my list of trains to travel by some day. Pretty soon (when the customs part is sorted out on the Amsterdam end) it will be possible to travel from Amsterdam to London directly on the Eurostar without transferring in Brussels, so that helps too for me as a Dutchman.

I've been on a fair amount of sleeper trains and the Caledonian has been the most comfortable so far. For the opposite, the most uncomfortable one to sleep in was the Hong Kong to Shanghai one. I paid extra for the Deluxe option, can't even imagine how hard the bed would have been on the lower classes. Still, was a pretty cool journey.

I took a 44 hour train from Delhi to Bombay. The "bed" was a plastic-covered sheet of wood, like a cheap kitchen worktop. That was uncomfortable. I think it was standard class.

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

#155

Post by ant6n »

nathankunicki wrote: post #142
munificent wrote: post #99

I recently took a train from Seattle to Portland with my family. One difference compared to flying that it took me a while to realize was how amazingly quiet it is. On a plane, the engines are right there out on the wing screaming and conducting that sound directly into the airframe next to you. With a train, the engine is way up front, hundreds of yards a way, separated by several linkages. The end result is that a…

Worth noting that trains with a locomotive up front are quite rare these days (although most common in the US - Amtrak Acela notwithstanding). Most of the rest of the world has gone down the "multiple unit" route, where there are smaller motors in each car, under your feet, and there are no dedicated locomotives. https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Multiple_unit

For long distances and even regional trains there still exist plenty of locomotives.

And BTW, even many high speed trains, including tgv duplex and the acela u nention are effectively locomotive hauled trains.

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

#156

Post by Symbiote »

graeme wrote: post #137
ekianjo wrote: post #110

Earlier quoted context omitted.

> The EU should force a carbon tax on plane fuel for intra-EU flights and subsidize rail with the money. You are aware that most of Europe produces electricity by burning fossil fuel right? So by all logic we should apply a strict carbon tax on rail as well.

An actual carbon tax on carbon would tax both trains and planes fairly. Planes use much more co2 per capita and so the result would be comparatively cheaper trains nonetheless. Though I don't think most trains are electric, and I think they do have a fuel tax.

By usage, most trains used in Europe probably are electric. It makes sense to invest in electrification where usage is most intense.

For example, in Britain "In 2006, 40%—3,062 miles (4,928 km) of the British rail network was electrified, and 60% of all rail journeys were by electric traction (both by locomotives and multiple units)".

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Railway_electrification_in_Gre...

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

#157

Post by puranjay »

gingabriska wrote: post #130
legitster wrote: post #102

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Love that route. Also, on a train the ride is so much smoother - no starts or stop or dealing with traffic. The pricing is nuts, though. A one way train ticket for that route is $36. The same trip via car takes about the same amount of time and $20 in gas. The train is a nice luxury for one person, but for the whole family it becomes very expensive. Passenger rail in the US is absurd.

In India you can go north to south and east to west for that much money in AC train.

Yeah but you better hope your constipation kicks in because I'm never going to a bathroom on any Indian train

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

#158

Post by princekolt »

ant6n wrote: post #155
nathankunicki wrote: post #142

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Worth noting that trains with a locomotive up front are quite rare these days (although most common in the US - Amtrak Acela notwithstanding). Most of the rest of the world has gone down the "multiple unit" route, where there are smaller motors in each car, under your feet, and there are no dedicated locomotives. https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Multiple_unit

For long distances and even regional trains there still exist plenty of locomotives. And BTW, even many high speed trains, including tgv duplex and the acela u nention are effectively locomotive hauled trains.

Yes but the TGV is all based on 70s technology. The more modern trains (such as Siemens Velaro, Alstom AGV, Bomardier ETR 1000) are all multiple-units.

One notable exception is the Bombardier/Talgo 350 (known in Spain as "the Duck" for obvious reasons).

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

#159

Post by justaguyhere »

Freak_NL wrote: post #4

Österreichische Bundesbahnen (ÖBB) took over all remaining sleepers run by Deutsche Bahn (DB) some years ago. One downside of this was the dropping of the Amsterdam–Munich sleeper — ÖBB's nexus lies in Vienna. The Netherlands currently has no sleeper trains, which is rather unfortunate, because the sleeper train appears to gaining in popularity after a period of decline. Increasingly, people want to avoid flying if r…

Taking even a half decent train is worth it if it means avoiding the airport security theater.

Also, anyone else get annoyed with tons of shops at airports? I think of airports as mega malls with some planes attached to them :(

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

#160

Post by ant6n »

graeme wrote: post #137
ekianjo wrote: post #110

Earlier quoted context omitted.

> The EU should force a carbon tax on plane fuel for intra-EU flights and subsidize rail with the money. You are aware that most of Europe produces electricity by burning fossil fuel right? So by all logic we should apply a strict carbon tax on rail as well.

An actual carbon tax on carbon would tax both trains and planes fairly. Planes use much more co2 per capita and so the result would be comparatively cheaper trains nonetheless. Though I don't think most trains are electric, and I think they do have a fuel tax.

In Europe most trains are electric. Even where trains run on diesel they are probably 10x as fuel efficient as flying.
Post reply on HN