Live data from Hacker News

More emphasis on trains in Europe to replace flights

back-on-track.eu

71–80 of 207 posts

Re: More emphasis on trains in Europe to replace flights

#71
post #22

Trains can't replace flights. You can't get from Munich to London in 2 hours with a train. Trains are often much more expensive than flights too.

Going from Brussels to London is great with the Eurostar. It's fast, you can walk around to the bar, and don't have to show up too early.

So it depends, but obviously there are cases where they do offer a better alternative.

Re: More emphasis on trains in Europe to replace flights

#72
post #49
post #5

As a European I love this. Not only because it's better for the environment but I really like trains. They are confy, fast and cheap. There's no need to pay extra for your baggage, you just hop in with your stuff, take a seat, read, watch a movie, listen to a podcast or sleep for a while and you're already at your destination.

Trains are really slow actually.

200 or 300 km/h

I wouldn't call that slow. Not as fast as a plane but it's not slow at all.

Re: More emphasis on trains in Europe to replace flights

#73

Last weekend, I took the night train from Briancon to Paris, step in at ~21:00, step out at 07:00 the next morning. My first time in a night train, pretty surreal but pleasant experience. I had to take a semi connecting train from Paris to the Netherlands (where I live), so it would be so awesome just to wake up on destination. I'm considering if it's a good idea to tax air travel inside the EU to help the trains mov…

Not taxed at all? Is that really the case? Most tickets I get are usually £10 fare then like £50 taxes? I think those are passenger duty Vs the actual flight itself though if that is what you mean?

Those are usually airport fees and such, I don't know where you get these numbers, but the airline pays the airport for the use of the terminal, baggage handling, air traffic control, etc.

This is different from tax, as without it you would not fly.

Re: More emphasis on trains in Europe to replace flights

#74

I really don't get why trains can be so expensive and what we need to do to fix that. To an extent, flying is just way too cheap. I mean, I was looking at a roundtrip london/barcelona just last week, it was $25. By train I'm looking at at least 10 hours, likely more like 15, and $300. Both the $25 and the $300 just seem wrong. Flying is way too cheap, but I also don't get how $300 per person is competitive against so…

Jet fuel is tax free, energy and diesel for trains is not. https://simpleflying.com/eu-jet-fuel-tax/

Re: More emphasis on trains in Europe to replace flights

#75
post #39

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Especially when you account boarding, navigating the airport, having to show up at least half an hour before the flight, security checkups... All time-consuming tasks related to boarding the actual aircraft that you don't have to go through to hop on a train.

No, you have to run like crazy hoping not to lose the connection train, being stopped in the middle of nowhere without any information, stuffed into wagons without air conditioning and possibility to open the windows, cramped with more passengers than available seats, without any place to stuff luggage, out of order toilets,....

None of those is somehow intrinsic to train travel, as I’m sure you’re aware. Quality of service is just a function of priorities.

Re: More emphasis on trains in Europe to replace flights

#76

I really don't get why trains can be so expensive and what we need to do to fix that. To an extent, flying is just way too cheap. I mean, I was looking at a roundtrip london/barcelona just last week, it was $25. By train I'm looking at at least 10 hours, likely more like 15, and $300. Both the $25 and the $300 just seem wrong. Flying is way too cheap, but I also don't get how $300 per person is competitive against so…

> I really don't get why trains can be so expensive

They’re more expensive because they’re better.

Re: More emphasis on trains in Europe to replace flights

#77
post #52

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Depends on what distances you are travelling I suppose; the prices for longer travel are, imho, very high and sure it is comfy but compared to a plane? Planes are cheaper and much faster. At the same price I think many would still take the plane. If trains were vastly cheaper, then maybe it would change a lot. But only inside the Netherlands, I only know a few commuters in my circles who go by train; the rest drive a…

Also, trains in the Netherlands are highly unreliable with regular unplanned shutdowns (due to natural factors like heavy rain or human factors like high suicide rates by jumping infront of trains). Also, commuters tend to be too comfortable (taking off their shoes, talking loudly on the phone or messy eating).

Internationally speaking, trains in Netherlands are pretty good IMO. Dutch people love to complain about it because we're sticklers for being on time, but if you compare internationally Dutch trains really aren't so bad.

Re: More emphasis on trains in Europe to replace flights

#78
It all comes down to cost vs convenience. I don’t think rail is the answer long term. Trains are generally slower and less comfortable than air travel. Not to mention often similarly priced or more expensive.

I’m more excited by the prospect of electric/hydrogen powered regional air travel. IMHO that is what will start to make a real difference.

Re: More emphasis on trains in Europe to replace flights

#79
post #52

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Depends on what distances you are travelling I suppose; the prices for longer travel are, imho, very high and sure it is comfy but compared to a plane? Planes are cheaper and much faster. At the same price I think many would still take the plane. If trains were vastly cheaper, then maybe it would change a lot. But only inside the Netherlands, I only know a few commuters in my circles who go by train; the rest drive a…

Also, trains in the Netherlands are highly unreliable with regular unplanned shutdowns (due to natural factors like heavy rain or human factors like high suicide rates by jumping infront of trains). Also, commuters tend to be too comfortable (taking off their shoes, talking loudly on the phone or messy eating).

Dutch trains are actually highly punctual, especially when you consider how many people they are transporting.

Re: More emphasis on trains in Europe to replace flights

#80

I really don't get why trains can be so expensive and what we need to do to fix that. To an extent, flying is just way too cheap. I mean, I was looking at a roundtrip london/barcelona just last week, it was $25. By train I'm looking at at least 10 hours, likely more like 15, and $300. Both the $25 and the $300 just seem wrong. Flying is way too cheap, but I also don't get how $300 per person is competitive against so…

Well firstly, you don't need to do any work on the terrain that the plane operates on. Meanwhile a train will require contiguous tracks. That might not be a huge hurdle if you need to get between two places with flat land between them, but add water, mountains, forests and whatnot, and that makes it much harder to get a train from one place to another. An airplane just needs two airstrips.
Post reply on HN