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

The integrated timetable of Switzerland

jokteur.com

Post reply on HN
Print view View original

141–150 of 162 posts

Re: The integrated timetable of Switzerland

#141

Post by ur-whale »

londons_explore wrote: post #54
mfsch wrote: post #10

What isn’t explained in the article is how this was made possible. While carefully adjusting departure times is certainly part of it, there were also a range of construction projects that shaved minutes off the travel times between major hubs to bring them just below multiples of 30 minutes (and 15 minutes in some cases). This makes it much easier to coordinate arrivals and departures and minimize transfer times. htt…

I hope that every infrastructure project tries to make a measure of the total economic gain of said project. Getting people around quicker is part of that (many models use a cost-per-hour for citizen time on the train). More efficient connections are part of travel time, and a simulation of a large number of potential journeys on some proposed infrastructure would show that. That means that when government is conside…

> I hope that every infrastructure project tries to make a measure of the total economic gain of said project.

This is basically impossible to do short of shutting the system down for year to measure the loss (unthinkable).

And even then, you'd have a measurement that doesn't mean anything because it couldn't measure the opportunity costs of the path not taken when the chocie was made initially.

As a matter of fact, I'll go one step further: I don't even think the question makes sense.

Economies are chaotic systems, and even if it is sometimes rather clear after the fact that a specific choice leads to overall positive outcomes (such as choosing to implement a high-quality public transportation system in Switzerland), actually measuring the "gain" is basically impossible. Worse: it's an ill-defined question.

Re: The integrated timetable of Switzerland

#142

Post by ur-whale »

jeromegv wrote: post #74
londons_explore wrote: post #54

Earlier quoted context omitted.

I hope that every infrastructure project tries to make a measure of the total economic gain of said project. Getting people around quicker is part of that (many models use a cost-per-hour for citizen time on the train). More efficient connections are part of travel time, and a simulation of a large number of potential journeys on some proposed infrastructure would show that. That means that when government is conside…

They do this for transit projects in Toronto. They calculate the total infrastructure + operational cost of the project over 60 years then compare it with the estimated economical benefits of having this project. They still ended up approving many negative projects, even while there were other cheaper/better located transit projects with more benefits. The political cost of cancelling those projects was higher (ex: M…

> They do this for transit projects in Toronto.

They may do this, but whether the number they derive has any kind of meaning or value is another thing altogether.

Re: The integrated timetable of Switzerland

#143

Post by bobthepanda »

ur-whale wrote: post #141
londons_explore wrote: post #54

Earlier quoted context omitted.

I hope that every infrastructure project tries to make a measure of the total economic gain of said project. Getting people around quicker is part of that (many models use a cost-per-hour for citizen time on the train). More efficient connections are part of travel time, and a simulation of a large number of potential journeys on some proposed infrastructure would show that. That means that when government is conside…

> I hope that every infrastructure project tries to make a measure of the total economic gain of said project. This is basically impossible to do short of shutting the system down for year to measure the loss (unthinkable). And even then, you'd have a measurement that doesn't mean anything because it couldn't measure the opportunity costs of the path not taken when the chocie was made initially. As a matter of fact,…

this is already done; this is what modelling and simulation is for. at least in the US pretty much all projects require some kind of alternatives analysis, and at least one of those alternatives must be "do nothing at all."

whether the model's assumptions are correct, and whether politicians actually allocate funds based on projected efficacy, are another matter entirely.

Re: The integrated timetable of Switzerland

#144

Post by bobthepanda »

ISL wrote: post #129
mrep wrote: post #112

Earlier quoted context omitted.

You're looking for the Farebox recovery ratio [0]. Japan and honk kong: Mostly yes. Europe: Mostly no but at least a good portion of it is for most. US: Not even close. [0]: https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Farebox_recovery_ratio

Except Amtrak, which on that page is listed at 95%. Why are the US regional transit ratios so low? They're taking in real money, yet the costs are 4-5x the revenue.

Theres a couple things wrong with regional transit in the US

* it's rarely the fastest way to get to your destination, wherever it may be, so doesn't attract passengers

* to build on the above points, the suburbanization of jobs in recent decades has reduced the ability of transit to compete, since transit mostly performs best heading quickly into congested city centers; suburbs are also diffuse, which make them hard to serve with frequent transit

* labor productivity in US transit is really low. as a general example, in the US most commuter rail systems still check individual tickets on every journey, which is very labor intensive. EU systems tend to use proof-of-payment, which basically means most of the time you're on the honor system, but if a roving inspector catches you without a ticket you'll get charged a punitive fine worth several months of fares. transit unions are probably one of the few US unions with teeth left, and they fight anything perceived as cutting jobs.

* US systems charge flat rates as a kind of social policy for the poor, which is good for them but bad for the balance sheet

one thing to note is that pretty much all the North American agencies on the list, unlike most of the Asian and European ones also on the list, integrate bus operations, and bus operations pretty much never make money due to the lower passengers per driver and high fuel costs.

Re: The integrated timetable of Switzerland

#145

Post by izacus »

misja111 wrote: post #91
runeks wrote: post #62

Earlier quoted context omitted.

> Man it costs a lot of money to maintain this, but Switzerland will continue to invest heavily into rail service, backed by the public: https://www.bav.admin.ch/bav/en/home/modes-of-transport/rail ... Isn’t it paid for through ticket fees? Or is it subsidized by the state?

The Swiss rail company, SBB, is owned by the state. In 2021 it made a loss of 325 million CHF, which is about 3.3% of its total turnover. So it's paid mostly through ticket fees and for a small part by the state.

Quoting coronavirus pandemic numbers in a country where people are ordered to stay at home is a pretty dishonest argument.

SBB made profit it 2019 for example.

Re: The integrated timetable of Switzerland

#146

Post by treis »

ISL wrote: post #129
mrep wrote: post #112

Earlier quoted context omitted.

You're looking for the Farebox recovery ratio [0]. Japan and honk kong: Mostly yes. Europe: Mostly no but at least a good portion of it is for most. US: Not even close. [0]: https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Farebox_recovery_ratio

Except Amtrak, which on that page is listed at 95%. Why are the US regional transit ratios so low? They're taking in real money, yet the costs are 4-5x the revenue.

That number is wrong. For 2021 Amtrak received 4.7 billion in Federal money while their revenue was 2.1 billion.

Re: The integrated timetable of Switzerland

#147

Post by vladharbuz »

iggldiggl wrote: post #51
vladharbuz wrote: post #13

Earlier quoted context omitted.

As someone who has lived long-term in both countries, I think that while the Swiss system is absolutely better than the UK system, people in the UK are a bit _too_ self-deprecating about the UK rail system, which is, all things considered, relatively good. Honestly, the biggest pain point in my eyes is that, because of privatisation, it's not all integrated into a single booking/refund/information system, which unfor…

> Honestly, the biggest pain point in my eyes is that, because of privatisation, it's not all integrated into a single booking/refund/information system, which unfortunately does it make it _feel_ quite flakey. Despite some shortcomings in that area, at least in the UK they did keep a common ticketing system with through-ticketing (and integral passenger rights for the whole of your journey) between operators even th…

I have to admit I don't fully understand the issue you're talking about, but I'd like to find out more. Could you give an example? I've booked trains entirely via DB from Basel Bad Bf to Copenhagen, for example, but perhaps you mean something else?

Re: The integrated timetable of Switzerland

#148

Post by vladharbuz »

martinald wrote: post #38
vladharbuz wrote: post #13

Earlier quoted context omitted.

As someone who has lived long-term in both countries, I think that while the Swiss system is absolutely better than the UK system, people in the UK are a bit _too_ self-deprecating about the UK rail system, which is, all things considered, relatively good. Honestly, the biggest pain point in my eyes is that, because of privatisation, it's not all integrated into a single booking/refund/information system, which unfor…

It will be as of next year: https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Great_British_Railways .

How did I miss this? Thank you for linking it, I'm very curious how things will turn out!

Re: The integrated timetable of Switzerland

#149

Post by bobthepanda »

vladharbuz wrote: post #147
iggldiggl wrote: post #51

Earlier quoted context omitted.

> Honestly, the biggest pain point in my eyes is that, because of privatisation, it's not all integrated into a single booking/refund/information system, which unfortunately does it make it _feel_ quite flakey. Despite some shortcomings in that area, at least in the UK they did keep a common ticketing system with through-ticketing (and integral passenger rights for the whole of your journey) between operators even th…

I have to admit I don't fully understand the issue you're talking about, but I'd like to find out more. Could you give an example? I've booked trains entirely via DB from Basel Bad Bf to Copenhagen, for example, but perhaps you mean something else?

I think they mean if you wanted to book a multi-leg trip of which only one leg is DB operated, it's a mess to coordinate and buy for different operators.

(I have no experience with this, but that's my interpretation of the comment.)

Re: The integrated timetable of Switzerland

#150

Post by lolc »

eterevsky wrote: post #104

It would be interesting to see what will happen if the times of the trains are moved to random other times within the hour. In might well be that short transfer times is just statistical consequence of having many scheduled trains. There are probably some trains that are intentionally synchronized, but I don't think there's too many of them, because synchronizing all trains is simply impossible. For instance if you h…

Oh but the hubs stations in Switzerland do feature synchronized arrivals and departures on a 30 min schedule. It works so well you don't generally have to look up connections. Just be there at the sync time to board wherever.

This is a plan that shows the hubs and their sync time: https://upload.wikimedia.org/wikipedia/commons/thumb/a/a6/Kn...

You'll notice the ebb and flow of passengers if you sit at a hub for half an hour. Most people won't see the ebb because they're on their connecting train.

Post reply on HN