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

Europe is investing heavily in trains

nytimes.com

Post reply on HN
Print view View original

211–220 of 654 posts

Re: Europe is investing heavily in trains

#211

Post by lioeters »

ls15 wrote: post #190
jhgb wrote: post #154

Earlier quoted context omitted.

> the train will often just stop at some station and the passengers are told "the train ends here". They then have to figure out their journey using alternative trains. In the Czech Republic, what would happen in that case would be that the railway company would shuttle the passengers to their destination using buses. This doesn't happen in Germany?

The typical scenario is that passengers can just take another train. Depending on the ticket, the railway is responsible for refunding cost for alternative transportation (EU law), but there can be frustrating edge cases where people are left stranded, because there is no alternative, but a lot of bureaucracy. The railway may be responsible for refunding accommodation then, but I think this would not necessarily be t…

My most memorable train experience in Germany was when Deutsche Bahn left me in Munich in the middle of the night. I had a connection there but my first train was ~10 minutes late, and my second train had already left. So I spent the whole night at the train station until ~5am when I could catch another train in the direction I needed. I've taken many train trips in the Czech Republic, and that has never happened.

Re: Europe is investing heavily in trains

#212

Post by Symbiote »

NovemberWhiskey wrote: post #143
Sharlin wrote: post #56

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Not so. The whole point of trains is that expenses are largely one-off. Building the infrastructure is expensive. Recurring costs are much lower than other modes of land transport, ceteris paribus.

Rail is much more expensive to maintain than roads on a per-kilometer basis - where are you getting your numbers from?

High speed rail is much more expensive to maintain than ordinary rail. Motorways are also more expensive to maintain than normal roads, but I think the railway has more capacity than both.

The comparison for a freight railway vs. an equivalent road is obvious: private companies who need the entire capacity, like mines, build railways.

(I will leave it to someone else to find figures for high speed rail vs. an equivalent motorway.)

Re: Europe is investing heavily in trains

#213

Post by chrisseaton »

fredoliveira wrote: post #9
uuyi wrote: post #3

Good on you Europe. Here in the UK we are heavily investing in rail replacement busses at the moment.

The UK is a European country. Not in the EU anymore, but you folks didn't move continents ;-)

In the UK, 'Europe' in this kind of context has almost always meant 'the continental mainland'. That's not a Brexit thing - that's the terminology for as long as I've been alive.

Re: Europe is investing heavily in trains

#214

Post by DrBazza »

namdnay wrote: post #42
fredoliveira wrote: post #9

Earlier quoted context omitted.

The UK is a European country. Not in the EU anymore, but you folks didn't move continents ;-)

To be pedantic, they never were on the continent :) Apart from Gibraltar I guess

Never you say? https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Doggerland

Re: Europe is investing heavily in trains

#215

Post by bombcar »

lqet wrote: post #65
skrbjc wrote: post #34

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Thanks for your perspective from someone close to the situation there. I believe many Americans have a picture of a perfect system in Europe, but the truth is likely different. Can you elaborate on the negative aspects of the train system, as you see it?

A short answer for Germany would be: the system is operating at its absolute limits. The results are employee burnout and bad reliability. An example: a few years ago, they introduced a new way to reduce delays caused by trains arriving so late at their destination that they cannot make their scheduled return trip. This is the so-called "Pofalla-Turn", named after the manager who supported it: if a train has a delay…

Amtrak does that sometimes (the train and/or crew die on the rails) but then they produce a bus from somewhere and get you to your destination.

At least in the US, once a company has accepted you on your journey they have to eventually get you to your destination, or get you to agree to give up. One time the train even stopped and told people trying to make a connection to get out; they'd called taxis to meet the other train.

Re: Europe is investing heavily in trains

#216

Post by DominikPeters »

noirbot wrote: post #200
Goronmon wrote: post #187

Earlier quoted context omitted.

The numbers seem large when they're in absolutes, but per capita it's moved from ~0.91 trips per person per year to ~1.19 trips per person per year. I mean, if the goal is to make the smallest number, why stop at "per person per year"? If you instead reflected the number as "per person per second" then you would see that the improvement is barely measurable.

But that seems like a reasonably understandable number? For all that everyone talks about how amazing trains are in other countries, I'm a little surprised to learn that I take Amtrak more in the US than the average German citizen takes DB, which is generally a much better system. That said, that seems like a pretty good improvement, percentage-wise, but a lot of folks talk about trains in Europe as if it's so amazin…

Looks like in 2019 there were 200-250 million airplane trips starting or ending in Germany. So maybe the surprise is how little average people travel rather than how little they rail.

Re: Europe is investing heavily in trains

#217

Post by DrBazza »

sschueller wrote: post #76
mywittyname wrote: post #17

Time is money, so I don't think trains can ever compete with flying for long-distance travel (>1000miles). They could do like the USA does and make flying such a time-consuming pain in the ass that it's rarely worth it for trips under 5 hours.

I can hop in a train at Zürich main station in Switzerland and be in Paris in 4 hours or I can get in another one and be in Milan in 3 and half hours. On my trip I can use the internet, go to the restaurant or relax in the quiet carriage. No turbolance, no weather delays and the ride is very quiet. How much work can you really get done going via airplane? How much time do you waste going through security and how well…

Yup. Door to door from south east England to the French Alps is nigh on identical if you take a plane and all then ceremony around that, or just jump on the Eurostar and travel mostly at 140mph or so.

Re: Europe is investing heavily in trains

#218

Post by ascar »

DominikPeters wrote: post #216
noirbot wrote: post #200

Earlier quoted context omitted.

But that seems like a reasonably understandable number? For all that everyone talks about how amazing trains are in other countries, I'm a little surprised to learn that I take Amtrak more in the US than the average German citizen takes DB, which is generally a much better system. That said, that seems like a pretty good improvement, percentage-wise, but a lot of folks talk about trains in Europe as if it's so amazin…

Looks like in 2019 there were 200-250 million airplane trips starting or ending in Germany. So maybe the surprise is how little average people travel rather than how little they rail.

Also all international trips are irrelevant for comparison as the ICE traffic is national.

Re: Europe is investing heavily in trains

#219

Post by reggieband »

tistoon wrote: post #160

..and Canada is yet the only G7 country to not have a high-speed train. In fact, in Canada, trains are slow, expensive and not well-deserved that you are better-off using your car or plane ¯\_(ツ)_/¯ Barcelona-Madrid | 503km | 2h30 by train | 46$CAD (33 euros) Toronto-Montreal | 541km | 5h by train | 93$CAD (68 euros)

My dream is a high-speed train from Vancouver to Kelowna and Calgary, with an optional leg to Edmonton. Like a Rocky Mountain Express. I believe this would be a massive driver of economic growth for the West Coast of Canada.

What hurts my soul is that Canada has the wealth to afford it, the engineering chops to build it but we lack the political will. Even more I feel we lack the belief and the vision.

Re: Europe is investing heavily in trains

#220

Post by sien »

novembermike wrote: post #91
AnonCoward4 wrote: post #33

Earlier quoted context omitted.

And in addition to that they also removed a lot of rail lines, especially goods traffic. It would've been a boon to have fewer trucks on the motorway and probably better for the environment.

European trains don't really do that much freight though. They tend to be optimized to carry people. America is actually way ahead of Europe in terms of rail freight, something like 10x depending on the measurement.

It's really worth looking at freight modal share by transport type. The US does do really well. As does Australia.

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

Post reply on HN