Direct Train to Europe: London to the Mediterranean • Hacker News Board

Re: Direct Train to Europe: London to the Mediterranean

#11

Post by [deleted] » Sat, May 30, 2015, 7:12 PM UTC

EliRivers wrote: post #8

Scoundreller wrote: post #3

Heathrow (and perhaps UK airport security as a whole) is also more restrictive in my experience than US/Canada/Schengen airports, so there's another point for the train. (Seized contact lens solution bottle, I'm looking at you!)

Not if you're just transiting. Sterile transit just plain doesn't exist at US airports (or at least, didn't when I last checked, which was a few years ago - maybe things are different now?), so changing planes takes bloody hours instead of minutes, and requires going through exit procedures and then coming back through security.

[deleted]

Re: Direct Train to Europe: London to the Mediterranean

#12

Post by guard-of-terra » Sat, May 30, 2015, 7:14 PM UTC

There is rail connection between Arkhangelsk and Sochi (that's around 2500 km), so why not with western europe shorter distances and faster trains.

I don't see why they have to leave trains at all for customs. This seems easily fixable.

Re: Direct Train to Europe: London to the Mediterranean

#13

Post by guard-of-terra » Sat, May 30, 2015, 7:16 PM UTC

protomyth wrote: post #2

"After 9/11 air travel started to become far more time-consuming - for reasons of security which no one would ever criticise. People used to say no-one wanted to be on a train for more than three hours but I think four would now be more accurate." I'm with you on the 4 hours, but I would be happy to criticize the security theater after 9/11.

"no-one wanted to be on a train for more than three hours" Why is it so?

People easily tolerate 3h on a plane, and trains are much more comfortable than planes (more space, free to roam).

And you don't have to get to airport, get from airport, check in, wait for baggage.

I would say 5 hours should be non-issue.

"As a rail enthusiast I would love to see trains to Berlin or Milan or even Moscow. But realistically that is many years away."

Remember there's already a direct train connection between Moscow and Paris.

Most people choose to fly these days, of course.

Re: Direct Train to Europe: London to the Mediterranean

#14

Post by ChuckMcM » Sat, May 30, 2015, 7:20 PM UTC

I find it fascinating that much of the hold up is having multiple signalling systems for each country in their train. Is there a web site that talks about the different systems in some more detail? I've been following Caltrain's installation of new signalling (in theory to support more frequent trains and the high speed rail service) and was surprised to find them as complicated as they are.

Re: Direct Train to Europe: London to the Mediterranean

#15

Post by seszett » Sat, May 30, 2015, 7:22 PM UTC

switch007 wrote: post #7

"Passengers ... will need to get off at Lille, go up to the customs hall and in effect start their journey again. ... Even some of those who knew of the Lille stop were surprised to find they had to carry their luggage throughout" Who would want to do that? Not only that, the Marseille train leaves London at 07:19! Great for people in London, not so great if you live outside. Firstly, it might not be possible to get…

Your flight arrives at Marignane though, taxi to Marseille is around 40€ and half an hour. I don't know how long and expensive is the journey to London's airports.

Re: Direct Train to Europe: London to the Mediterranean

#16

Post by gpvos » Sat, May 30, 2015, 7:24 PM UTC

UnoriginalGuy wrote: post #6

Seems like unification of signaling systems across European railways might help alleviate some of these problems. It would be interesting to see if they're actually legitimately dissimilar or more just similar but incompatible for historical reasons.

The systems vary wildly, from inductive loops at the side of the track placed near each signal (PZB), electrical contacts between the rails (Crocodile), to signals transmitted through the rails (ATB) or through leaky cables along the whole track (LZB). The installed base is obviously huge. There are often several not-entirely-compatible variants within each country, mostly for cost reasons.

Oh yes, also patents.

Currently railways are installing the European ERTMS system on many tracks, usually as a second system so both trains using the local traditional system and the new ERTMS can ride there. However, it is quite complicated and it turns out not all trainside implementations talk correctly with all railside ones.

Re: Direct Train to Europe: London to the Mediterranean

#17

Post by Scoundreller » Sat, May 30, 2015, 7:26 PM UTC

EliRivers wrote: post #8

Scoundreller wrote: post #3

Heathrow (and perhaps UK airport security as a whole) is also more restrictive in my experience than US/Canada/Schengen airports, so there's another point for the train. (Seized contact lens solution bottle, I'm looking at you!)

Not if you're just transiting. Sterile transit just plain doesn't exist at US airports (or at least, didn't when I last checked, which was a few years ago - maybe things are different now?), so changing planes takes bloody hours instead of minutes, and requires going through exit procedures and then coming back through security.

Well, while going Canada->LHR->Schengen airport, I definitely had to go through UK security again, as well as passport control to connect to an "international" flight to France. I didn't even leave the terminal.

"Everyone who boards an aircraft at Heathrow has to be security screened to UK government standards. Even if you've already been through security checks at another airport, we're obliged to screen you again before you fly from Heathrow."

http://www.heathrowairport.com/heathrow-airport-guide/flight...

I guess when faced with the choice of taking a risk-based approach toward security, and applying an equal amount of security to all, they chose the latter.

At least the UK lets you check through your bags, unlike the US.

Re: Direct Train to Europe: London to the Mediterranean

#18

Post by seszett » Sat, May 30, 2015, 7:28 PM UTC

guard-of-terra wrote: post #13

protomyth wrote: post #2

"After 9/11 air travel started to become far more time-consuming - for reasons of security which no one would ever criticise. People used to say no-one wanted to be on a train for more than three hours but I think four would now be more accurate." I'm with you on the 4 hours, but I would be happy to criticize the security theater after 9/11.

"no-one wanted to be on a train for more than three hours" Why is it so? People easily tolerate 3h on a plane, and trains are much more comfortable than planes (more space, free to roam). And you don't have to get to airport, get from airport, check in, wait for baggage. I would say 5 hours should be non-issue. "As a rail enthusiast I would love to see trains to Berlin or Milan or even Moscow. But realistically that…

I have also taken a night train from Vienna to Paris (and then a regular TGV to La Rochelle).

Night trains are wonderful, they save you a night at the hotel, and they basically make the journey take no effective time from your holidays... but SNCF wants to get rid of them entirely, or so I heard.

Re: Direct Train to Europe: London to the Mediterranean

#19

Post by bnegreve » Sat, May 30, 2015, 7:33 PM UTC

switch007 wrote: post #7

"Passengers ... will need to get off at Lille, go up to the customs hall and in effect start their journey again. ... Even some of those who knew of the Lille stop were surprised to find they had to carry their luggage throughout" Who would want to do that? Not only that, the Marseille train leaves London at 07:19! Great for people in London, not so great if you live outside. Firstly, it might not be possible to get…

When I have to choose between a 2 hour flight and a 4 hours train ride, I choose the train. I hate airport security and I find it impossible to do anything in a plane.

I agree that flying is generally cheaper though.

Re: Direct Train to Europe: London to the Mediterranean

#20

Post by saryant » Sat, May 30, 2015, 7:37 PM UTC

EliRivers wrote: post #8

Scoundreller wrote: post #3

Heathrow (and perhaps UK airport security as a whole) is also more restrictive in my experience than US/Canada/Schengen airports, so there's another point for the train. (Seized contact lens solution bottle, I'm looking at you!)

Not if you're just transiting. Sterile transit just plain doesn't exist at US airports (or at least, didn't when I last checked, which was a few years ago - maybe things are different now?), so changing planes takes bloody hours instead of minutes, and requires going through exit procedures and then coming back through security.

Only for international arrivals. Domestic->domestic or domestic->international transits usually don't require reclearing security (other than screwball airports like LAX that just don't have airside connections between every terminal).