Here in the UK the train to London is five hours and £75. The coach is £15 and eight hours. Four people in a car perhaps £10 a head. Trains are nicer but there is something annoyingly mysterious about the ecomomcs of it all.
Europe is investing heavily in trains
221–230 of 654 posts
Re: Europe is investing heavily in trains
#222Earlier quoted context omitted.
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.
Give or take. There's plenty of trains between countries in Europe that would also be within driving distance.
In my mind, the optimal realistic situation is to have rail for longer distances (1-8 hours), but not trans-oceanic obviously, and then either ICE or local light rail for smaller trips
Re: Europe is investing heavily in trains
#223More feasible than planes to electrify or switch to hydrogen (hydrogenify?)
You still have diesel trains ?!
Wikipedia shows the percentage of electrified railway for all countries. It's 56% for the EU+UK.
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/List_of_countries_by_rail_tran...
Re: Europe is investing heavily in trains
#224Earlier quoted context omitted.
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…
What I meant was that the buses are provided if there's no other option, like another train.
In some cases, but not always. Probably depends on multiple factors.
Re: Europe is investing heavily in trains
#225Earlier 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…
> I take Amtrak more in the US than the average German citizen takes DB
Its more than ICE trains not more than the whole of DB. Its 100m ICE trips per year but 2600m DB trips per year in 2019 (c. 31 per capita per year)
https://www.statista.com/statistics/936254/deutsche-bahn-pas...
Re: Europe is investing heavily in trains
#226Earlier quoted context omitted.
Do you have a source? I'd expect rail to be more expensive from a capital expenditure perspective (laying rail, ties, buying cars, etc) but much cheaper to operate (coefficient of friction is lower between train wheels and rails than with rubber tires and roads, optimal speeding and slowing causing less wear on tracks, less downtime as rail repairs are much simpler than road repairs, etc)
In the UK, Network Rail spends about £150k per track kilometer per year on maintenance and renewal. Track needs constant maintenance through ballast redistribution and compaction to maintain track geometry; the rail itself needs to be ground regularly to maintain its shape; points systems need to be maintained, as well as signaling systems, earthworks and embankments, even vegetation. Maintenance costs for major road…
You need to factor in the cost of moving goods for each.
Re: Europe is investing heavily in trains
#227Earlier quoted context omitted.
Having commuted with both american and german rail systems before, my educated guess it's likely due to who owns the rails. American rail freight companies have far more control over prioritization than european freight companies. DB Netz owns the vast majority of german rail and therefore prioritizes what makes them the most money. Historically that's been carrying people due to all the government and company subsid…
But why couldn't DB Netz do both people and freight, if both are profitable (after subsidies for passenger traffic)? i.e. why does it have to be a choice?
Because things which are designed to be good at one thing will not be as good at other things. There's only so much rail network and given a conflict either freight is a priority or passengers are. You can't have two number 1 priorities.
Re: Europe is investing heavily in trains
#228One thing that's cool about intercity train travel is that, while high speed rail is an ~=obvious economic miracle, trains can be slow and still be commercially competitive. I would much rather take an overnight sleeper train than either an early morning flight or a night flight with hotel room. The sleeper train will arrive right to the city center and save a lot of hassle and I always sleep like a rock on sleeper t…
I think there’s a good value proposition for high speed rail when it comes to business travel, which is usually same day. But for non business travel, overnight does seem good. However, there is simply not a culture of overnight train in the US. In India, it is really common and many routes can be quite delightful.
Re: Europe is investing heavily in trains
#229Earlier 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.
Yea, that doesn't seem like that useful of a number, since Frankfurt is a fairly major layover airport for international travel.
I guess the more specific question would be how many Germans fly to elsewhere in Germany or Central Europe vs. taking a train. I generally have to either do a long car trip or a flight to get around in the US outside of some specific corridors. Presumably most of Europe has the option to take the train instead, but are they?
Re: Europe is investing heavily in trains
#230Earlier quoted context omitted.
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.
I never take the last possible connection of a day, because of this risk.