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

171–180 of 654 posts

Re: Europe is investing heavily in trains

#171

Post by hilbert42 »

I used to travel frequently between Vienna and Paris (to visit relatives in Paris) and I quickly stopped flying between the two cities when I discovered the city-to-city train then called the 'Mozart' (it ceased service in 2007): https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Mozart_(train).

I found that whilst the duration of the flying time was considerably shorter than the train trip the overall flying time was still quite long given all the rigmarole at the airports and getting to and from them.

I found that traveling this intercity circuit on the Mozart much more enjoyable and relaxing than flying even though the trip took typically between 13 and 14 hours (Wiki says 13h10), the food was quite excellent (for a train) and the trips were in the daytime so there was much scenery to look at. When not doing that I could occupy myself with written/paperwork work or read a book and not be interrupted. What was really excellent about the Mozart was that it was not only an intercity train but also it took me directly to the very heart of both cities—there was no need to travel to the outskirts of the cities to their airports (I've always found traveling to and from airports a nuisance and pain so I've always considered train travel a great advantage over flying (except when flying exceptionally long distances, intercontinental, etc.).

I've not done that circuit for quite some years now and I'm sorry to see the Mozart service terminated. After reading the article I did a check on its replacement service and it seems that now a section of the trip is by TGV and that there are now two changes between the cities. Despite the introduction of the TGV, the travel time between Paris and Vienna is 13h15 — which is all of 5 minutes longer than the nominal time taken by the Mozart. Shame really.

Nevertheless, I cannot help but believe that Europe's investment in passenger train transport will pay off handsomely. When I was doing a lot of traveling around Europe by train I found most of the services quite excellent—much more so than in Anglophone countries—and I reckon that the main reason for this is that culturally the Europeans seem to be much more at home with and adapted to train travel. As such, it's very unlikely that that investment in trains will be wasted.

Re: Europe is investing heavily in trains

#172

Post by Karrot_Kream »

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?

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)

Re: Europe is investing heavily in trains

#173

Post by atlasunshrugged »

hdjjhhvvhga wrote: post #122
atlasunshrugged wrote: post #106

As an American who doesn't drive, the experience of trains in the EU compared to the US is just delightful. Yes, there are super cheap flights and I used them often for longer haul trips but the trains were always amazing- I've done trips including Mariupol to Lviv, Budapest to Berlin, and Berlin to Munich and always had a great experience. The Romania-Chisinau line is quite old but part of its charm. I see a lot of…

I remember going to Crimea one summer some 20 years ago, it took almost 40 hours but boy it was something I'll never forget! Especially the babushkas with local produce, pelmeni and so on at every stop so you could buy them (so cheaply) just grabbing them from their hands through the window. Delicious food, great views and an excellent company. On the other side of the equations are superfast trains like the TGV, thi…

Ah that sounds amazing! On the trains in Ukraine they did still have the babushkas hawking produce and fish at the stops and I have had some lovely conversations on these trains but I would have loved to go to Crimea. A Siberian railway trip is still on the bucket list but I will wait until things are less contentious and so I'm not putting dollars into the hands of the Putin regime.

Re: Europe is investing heavily in trains

#174

Post by randomsearch »

ParksNet wrote: post #48

It doesn't make sense to emphasize passenger travel over goods transport for rail. Rail's strength is efficient transport of heavy loads at slow speeds. People are light and often want to go at high speeds. Europe should reorient its rail network for rail transport, and passengers can travel by bus or plane. But - Europe's rail network is completely reliant on subsidies, and its easier to get them when you're transpo…

According to a relative who has spent a lifetime being a transport nerd, rail is actually more suited to people transport and roads to goods.

The reason is surprisingly obvious in hindsight. You bring 1000 people into a city centre train station and then they deliver themselves to their final destination. But goods either have to be sent to single purpose custom built lines and depots (eg power stations) or else transferred to road and taken onwards in a multitude of vehicles.

I am personally very good at delivering myself autonomously on foot for several miles, and I will even transfer myself to another train in minutes without external equipment. Coal is generally less cooperative.

Worse, if you decide to keep people in cars, you have to build parking spaces absolutely everywhere they might possibly want to go, whereas most goods just need to be dropped off.

People on trains, goods on lorries.

Re: Europe is investing heavily in trains

#175

Post by ls15 »

lqet wrote: post #26

Here in Germany, for as long as I can remember, the government praises itself every year for investing as much in rail as never before. I have not noticed the service quality to change for the better over the last 15 years. The ever-rising investments seem to be only enough to keep the status quo of the crumbling infrastructure.

> Here in Germany, for as long as I can remember, the government praises itself every year for investing as much in rail as never before. I have not noticed the service quality to change for the better over the last 15 years. The ever-rising investments seem to be only enough to keep the status quo of the crumbling infrastructure.

And the ticket price inflation is twice as high as regular CPI.

Re: Europe is investing heavily in trains

#176

Post by twic »

isaacimagine wrote: post #75
agumonkey wrote: post #46

Earlier quoted context omitted.

A youtuber explained that Italy overlayed high speed rail routes now and that it's pretty brilliant. Things are moving.

I live in Italy and can attest that the high-speed rail running along the backbone of the Italian peninsula is really nice: it's clean, faster than a regional flight (no need for security, etc.), quiet, and it's fun to watch the hills roll by out the window.

I went from Rome to somewhere like Florence by train. Fast, easy, reasonably priced, and it was a short walk from my seat to a café car where a team of sharply uniformed gentlemen made me an excellent espresso!

Re: Europe is investing heavily in trains

#177

Post by IshKebab »

detritus wrote: post #90
namdnay wrote: post #42

Earlier quoted context omitted.

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

*stares at continental shelf depth map around the UK described on old European map on wall

Ha yes well... "the continent" refers to the European land mass. C.f. "continental breakfast". But the UK is part of the European continent in the continental shelf sense. The word "continent" is not really well defined. Here's a nice video about it:

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=hrsxRJdwfM0

Re: Europe is investing heavily in trains

#178

Post by m2fkxy »

andbberger wrote: post #157
emn13 wrote: post #112

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Note that if you travel from The Netherlands to Spain you might be traversing 6 different railway electrification systems that vary in critical stuff like voltages (and by more than a factor 10!) and possibly Hz, and some are AC and some are DC (not kidding). Also there will be at least 2 incompatible track gauges involved. And I bet other stuff like communications and routing systems are incompatible and safety crit…

incredible almost everything you said is wrong! > Note that if you travel from The Netherlands to Spain you might be traversing 6 different railway electrification systems that vary in critical stuff like voltages (and by more than a factor 10!) and possibly Hz, and some are AC and some are DC (not kidding). Also there will be at least 2 incompatible track gauges involved. And I bet other stuff like communications an…

I believe you could get from the Netherlands to Spain in just two trips: Amsterdam > Paris in Thalys, and Paris > Madrid in AVE (seasonal) or > Barcelona in TGV (neither involve track gauge change). You could do that in the span of a day and still have spare time, depending on how well the schedules match.

Re: Europe is investing heavily in trains

#179

Post by gbear605 »

thebean11 wrote: post #87
monksy wrote: post #70

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Yes/No. You can get a California zephyer ticket from Chicago->Seattle for 160 in coach one way. That's a really good deal for 2k+ miles, generous baggage allowance, etc (if you can tolerate that). Sleepers can go 1k+ for the 2.5d. In the winter (what I did) was 600$. I'm also not paying for the efficency. I'm paying for the experience of the hotel, meals, convenence of travel, and the ability to watch out the window.

I remember trying to get from NYC to DC and the prices being higher than flights. I took a bus instead.

Train prices go up a lot (a factor of 2 or more) when it’s close to the time of the train, since the price is based on how full the train is currently booked. You might get cheaper train trips by booking further out.

Buses will still beat the cost, but they’re slower and less comfortable.

Re: Europe is investing heavily in trains

#180

Post by atlasunshrugged »

PaulDavisThe1st wrote: post #159
atlasunshrugged wrote: post #106

As an American who doesn't drive, the experience of trains in the EU compared to the US is just delightful. Yes, there are super cheap flights and I used them often for longer haul trips but the trains were always amazing- I've done trips including Mariupol to Lviv, Budapest to Berlin, and Berlin to Munich and always had a great experience. The Romania-Chisinau line is quite old but part of its charm. I see a lot of…

Sadly, anyone noticeably younger than me missed the chance to ride the Hellas Express (Dortmund to Athens). 3 days, 2 nights. Rode it twice. Then Yugoslavia came apart, war broke out, and the Hellas Express was no more.

That would have been incredible. I had actually started one journey in Athens and did the usual beach thing on an island before flying to Hungary to begin a train trip up to Germany (where I was starting a new job some days later). I would certainly have taken a train if I could. I had a chance to spend a few days in Albania and Serbia just before the pandemic and was very pleasantly surprised as to the countries. I don't know why but Albania I had a picture in my head as a very Soviet brutal country stuck in the mid 1900's but I think I saw far more prosperity in Tirana than say in Skopje.
Post reply on HN