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

Koralm Railway

infrastruktur.oebb.at

Post reply on HN
Print view View original

51–60 of 206 posts

Re: Koralm Railway

#51

Post by rsynnott »

oniony wrote: post #24
monster_truck wrote: post #23

Earlier quoted context omitted.

7x longer for 11x the cost seems pretty good all things considered. Always thought it seemed like a waste to not also dig out a bunch of storage while we're down there. I'm sure there are good reasons we don't

It's not seven times longer. The Austrian line is 130km with 50km of tunnels. Length Tunnels Bridges Stations Cost Koralm 130km ~50km 100 12 €6b HS2 230km ~75km 100+ 4 €74b+ Obviously this does not give any indication of the complexity of each project. Tunnelling and building railway through a metropolis I would imagine is quite challenging.

As far as I can see, the 6bn is _just_ for the big 30km tunnel? Presumably the rest of it cost more.

Re: Koralm Railway

#52

Post by preisschild »

tasuki wrote: post #41
brnt wrote: post #12

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Is there any design? It's just the flag and a title + subtitle. Also, the EU is the most efficient government in terms of overhead, and having seen some of it up close not wasting time or money on "unifying design languages" for every single funding billboard is very much EU style. Just copy-paste by some local authority in Powerpoint in most cases, I bet.

What are the funding billboards for, anyway? They're an eyesore, and it's all paid by us EU taxpayers anyway. They should say "financed by you", or better yet, not exist to begin with.

I (pro-EU Austrian) think they are great, as they show that we also get huge benefits through our EU membership and that we can do such enormous megaprojects only together

Also, eyesore? What do you have against the EU flag?

Re: Koralm Railway

#53

Post by saubeidl »

throwaway2037 wrote: post #13
saubeidl wrote: post #7

I know its a small nitpick, but I got unreasonably annoyed at the two "Financed by EU fund x" banners having different flag sizes, paddings, fonts etc. How is there no unifying design language for these?

Do you mean these two? https://image-service.web.oebb.at/infra/.imaging/default/dam... https://image-service.web.oebb.at/infra/.imaging/default/dam...

Yup. Why are the paddings, fonts and colors all over the place? Just decide on one!

Re: Koralm Railway

#54

Post by rsynnott »

tasuki wrote: post #41
brnt wrote: post #12

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Is there any design? It's just the flag and a title + subtitle. Also, the EU is the most efficient government in terms of overhead, and having seen some of it up close not wasting time or money on "unifying design languages" for every single funding billboard is very much EU style. Just copy-paste by some local authority in Powerpoint in most cases, I bet.

What are the funding billboards for, anyway? They're an eyesore, and it's all paid by us EU taxpayers anyway. They should say "financed by you", or better yet, not exist to begin with.

I mean, see Brexit; there's a bit of a "what have the Romans ever done for us" aspect to a lot of euroscepticism. Some of the more Brexit-y regions were also amongst the poorest, and thus the largest beneficiaries of EU funding (eg https://www.theguardian.com/uk-news/2016/jun/26/cornwall-fea...)

The idea is to show people the benefits of the EU, essentially. It is unclear how well it works.

Cornwall, say, had reason to feel hard done by; it was the second-poorest NUTS 3 region in Northern Europe. It's just that they were directing their ire at Europe, and not at the national government where it belonged. All but one of the ten poorest NUTS 3 regions in Northern Europe were in the UK pre-Brexit (along with the very richest NUTS 3 region, inner London), and there's a reason for that.

(Of course, the problem is now solved by Brexit; as the UK no longer participates in Eurostat, _none_ of the poorest regions in the Eurostat statistics are in the UK!)

Re: Koralm Railway

#55

Post by gbil »

fzeindl wrote: post #6
franciscop wrote: post #4

This headline is a bit odd and doesn't represent the original title nor article content. What does "within budget" mean here? That it costed what the original budget set out to cost? Couldn't find anything related to the budget within the article.

It is mostly within budget, estimated in 2005 were 5.5 billion €, total cost as of today are 5.9 billion €, the difference being largely attributed to the pandemic and later addition of sections.

Is inflation included? Otherwise 5,5 billion in 2005 is >8billion in 2025.

Re: Koralm Railway

#56

Post by brnt »

tasuki wrote: post #41
brnt wrote: post #12

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Is there any design? It's just the flag and a title + subtitle. Also, the EU is the most efficient government in terms of overhead, and having seen some of it up close not wasting time or money on "unifying design languages" for every single funding billboard is very much EU style. Just copy-paste by some local authority in Powerpoint in most cases, I bet.

What are the funding billboards for, anyway? They're an eyesore, and it's all paid by us EU taxpayers anyway. They should say "financed by you", or better yet, not exist to begin with.

They put them up with and without the EU funding info, right? Here most is not EU funded, but there are still signs, because how else do you know what is going on? Or are big construction projects completely unsigned where you live?

Re: Koralm Railway

#57

Post by Y_Y »

fzeindl wrote: post #48
jfoster wrote: post #42

Earlier quoted context omitted.

You're using a strange definition of "within". It's 7% over.

In a world where large infrastructure projects regularly exceed their budget by 100-1000%, 7% is huge. It is important to show people that that is possible in government projects. If you find a more concise way of saying „with unusually small overrun of it‘s budget“ tell me. Also there were sections added after the initial estimate.

"only slightly over budget"

Re: Koralm Railway

#58

Post by paulgerhardt »

bigbinary wrote: post #20
fzeindl wrote: post #15

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Agreed, it was just important to me to point it out, since staying within such a massive budget on such a long timeline is a rare achievement.

Considering the original title is just the name of the railway, and I do not think “within budget” is editorializing, I think the commenter is being overly pedantic

I was curious about the forecasting success story here too. The German LOK article is better in this regard: https://www.lok-report.de/news/europa/item/62410-oesterreich...

Re: Koralm Railway

#59

Post by tchalla »

franciscop wrote: post #31
bigbinary wrote: post #20

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Considering the original title is just the name of the railway, and I do not think “within budget” is editorializing, I think the commenter is being overly pedantic

I opened the article expecting to see news about the budget and how they stayed within it, since that SEEMS like the biggest surprising news in a project like this. How is that overly pedantic?

I understand your expectation. That said, I think it's ok to add detail in commentary when the article doesn't mention it explicitly. So continuing to go upon the point that the article didn't mention the budget makes you seem as pedantic.

There are non-English articles on the budget too.

https://orf.at/stories/3414173/

Re: Koralm Railway

#60

Post by febusravenga »

tasuki wrote: post #39

> Crossing the Koralpe massif more quickly and with more comfort. That’s what the future of train travel from Graz to Klagenfurt looks like. With the Koralm Railway, you will arrive at your destination even quicker. The fastest connection will shrink from three hours to just 45 minutes. There aren't any big mountains between Graz and Klagenfurt. It's an hour on the Autobahn. That it took three hours by train... well,…

> they just had shitty railroad

The terrain is just hard railroad had do huge detour on this section

Look at map: https://mapy.com/en/turisticka?x=15.0703419&y=46.7076432&z=1...

Passes in those mountains are only ~1200m above valley level (~1650 abs). Yeah, perfectly ok to run railroad there.

Your autobahn climbs 600m on this section (to 1050m absolute) - it's way to high for railway to be effective.

Post reply on HN