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

In Europe, trains are full, and more are on the way

nytimes.com

Post reply on HN
Print view View original

221–229 of 229 posts

Re: In Europe, trains are full, and more are on the way

#221

Post by panick21_ »

lopis wrote: post #155
TacticalCoder wrote: post #151

Earlier quoted context omitted.

> I think because cars became much more reliable, we felt we didn't need these anymore. Oh that's a good point. Cars got comfier too: nowadays with AC and they're quieter etc. > The car could even charge while in the train Oh that'd be completely amazing!

It would be like the hyperloop but actually useful and effective!

Hyperloop does not contain cars, that a vacuum tube system. I think you are talking about the normal small tunnels from the Boring company, that's just called loop.

And its not actually useful or effective outside of a few specialized situations. Like in Switzerland where you only have 1 tunnel and no actual car tunnels. So all cars have to get on trains.

Re: In Europe, trains are full, and more are on the way

#222

Post by scott_w »

kasey_junk wrote: post #97
ericmay wrote: post #41

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Yep, it's misleading. The America is big argument fails to hold water once you actually take a look at a map. Take Columbus for example where we're within just a couple hours by train (could be less if we had any sort of seriousness about our country) away from: Chicago Detroit Cleveland Cincinnati Indianapolis Pittsburgh and maybe just a few hours away from other cities like Toronto, Buffalo, Louisville, and more.

The US has the largest rail network in the world (for now). It’s hugely dominated by freight. It’s not for lack of rail lines we don’t have good passenger service it’s a priority and preference issue. If you got a fast train between Indianapolis and Cleveland what would you do with it? Neither has reasonable public transit and aren’t dense cities that are good for walking. They also are only 4.5 hours away from each…

> They also are only 4.5 hours away from each other by car, something residents of both largely own.

Not to sound too flippant but this is the most American thing I've read that doesn't involve guns. Being in the UK, the idea of "only" being 4.5 hours away by car is unreal. This is exactly the kind of thing getting the train should be perfect for.

For context: that's longer than Manchester to London, essentially opposite ends of England!

Re: In Europe, trains are full, and more are on the way

#223

Post by scott_w »

panick21_ wrote: post #219
muspimerol wrote: post #138

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Sure, all mega cities have even larger metro areas. I'm not pretending Chicago doesn't have a huge metro area. But my point stands: the European route has much higher catchment than your proposed USA route, even if you include metro areas. Population density is not the only argument, although I think it's pretty clear why the US and EU are not comparable: https://luminocity3d.org/WorldPopDen/#4/38.51/-51.06 Most of t…

The US has like 6 Super-Metro complexes that are all perfect for trains. - Great Lakes - North East - Texas Triangle - Florida Super City - Bay Area - Southern Cali And of those the Lakes and the North East are perfect to connection. In all of them trains are massively underused. Frankly some of these couldn't be more perfectly placed for trains. But I do agree with your point. You need good local public transport. O…

I think this is the core of the issue. People are getting hung up on Madrid -> Berlin and coming up with things like New York -> San Francisco as a comparison. I don't know how many people regularly need to go 6 states across a vast continent...

Really, what it seems the discussion should focus on is those shorter (but still quite long!) journeys that people would likely want to do. Train lines in California seem to make a lot of sense. A quick look on Google Maps suggests there's no train between San Francisco and Los Angeles which seems insane to me!

Re: In Europe, trains are full, and more are on the way

#224

Post by JJMcJ »

62951413 wrote: post #186
JJMcJ wrote: post #16

Earlier quoted context omitted.

> small Europe Europe isn't microscopic. Paris to Amsterdam is about 300 miles, which is the same as Chicago to Cleveland. This is for intercity travel, and of course in the Western USA, except for the Pacific Coast, it is really not very dense.

SF to LA and SF to Crescent City are both over 350 miles and you never leave CA.

On the other hand:

Santa Barbara to San Diego

Bay Area to Sacramento

Sacramento to Bakersfield and on to LA

Portland to Seattle - or paralleling I-5 through Oregon.

All reasonably dense.

Re: In Europe, trains are full, and more are on the way

#225

Post by lolc »

maxwell22 wrote: post #180
foofie wrote: post #177

Earlier quoted context omitted.

> German trains wishing to enter Switzerland need to wait at the border so the DB’s, err, _erratic_ scheduling doesn’t perturb the much more rigorous Swiss system. I'm rather skeptic of this take. Railway operators provide services by reserving track sections and train stations in specific time windows which take into account travel speed and scheduling. Rail track capacity is typically reserved for periods of over a…

70% of German trains that arrive at their destination are “delayed” (30 min or more). A train that never arrives is not counted as delayed. About 30% of German trains do not arrive at their destination. In Switzerland, the stats are single low percentage digits. After multiple ultimatums, Switzerland stopped allowing German trains into Switzerland. The most popular connection between Switzerland and Germany (Zurich-M…

I doubt your stats, where'd you get them from? And there are multiple connections per day from Germany to central Switzerland. Take the Hamburg-Interlaken ICE for example.

Re: In Europe, trains are full, and more are on the way

#226

Post by kasey_junk »

scott_w wrote: post #222
kasey_junk wrote: post #97

Earlier quoted context omitted.

The US has the largest rail network in the world (for now). It’s hugely dominated by freight. It’s not for lack of rail lines we don’t have good passenger service it’s a priority and preference issue. If you got a fast train between Indianapolis and Cleveland what would you do with it? Neither has reasonable public transit and aren’t dense cities that are good for walking. They also are only 4.5 hours away from each…

> They also are only 4.5 hours away from each other by car, something residents of both largely own. Not to sound too flippant but this is the most American thing I've read that doesn't involve guns. Being in the UK, the idea of "only" being 4.5 hours away by car is unreal. This is exactly the kind of thing getting the train should be perfect for. For context: that's longer than Manchester to London, essentially oppo…

Indiana has “constitutional carry” which means that you need no licensing to carry a firearm, concealed or otherwise.

Re: In Europe, trains are full, and more are on the way

#227

Post by scott_w »

muspimerol wrote: post #138
sophacles wrote: post #130

Earlier quoted context omitted.

It's a bit misleading to claim: "The dense parts of Europe have 500k+ cities basically overlapping.", while pretending that Chicago doesn't have 6M+ additional people in its immediate suburbs who would also be able to use this hypothetical train. The US and EU structure administrative units a bit differently, so using the Urban or Metro populations for both is a better metric for population served. I agree that Europ…

Sure, all mega cities have even larger metro areas. I'm not pretending Chicago doesn't have a huge metro area. But my point stands: the European route has much higher catchment than your proposed USA route, even if you include metro areas. Population density is not the only argument, although I think it's pretty clear why the US and EU are not comparable: https://luminocity3d.org/WorldPopDen/#4/38.51/-51.06 Most of t…

> Most of the US looks more like Spain and less like Central Europe.

Spain has spent a decade building out its high speed rail network.

Re: In Europe, trains are full, and more are on the way

#228

Post by lopis »

panick21_ wrote: post #220
lopis wrote: post #142

Earlier quoted context omitted.

I think because cars became much more reliable, we felt we didn't need these anymore. The reintroduction of that type of service would mean you no longer thad to worry about your electric car's range when going on a road trip. The car could even charge while in the train.

It just makes no sense. You can get a car share in like 10min. Just go where you want to go and rent bikes or a car. Honestly in most places, you really don't need a car anyway.

But car shares get prohibitively expensive in very long trips. And there's no coverage outside the cities.

Re: In Europe, trains are full, and more are on the way

#229

Post by panick21_ »

scott_w wrote: post #223
panick21_ wrote: post #219

Earlier quoted context omitted.

The US has like 6 Super-Metro complexes that are all perfect for trains. - Great Lakes - North East - Texas Triangle - Florida Super City - Bay Area - Southern Cali And of those the Lakes and the North East are perfect to connection. In all of them trains are massively underused. Frankly some of these couldn't be more perfectly placed for trains. But I do agree with your point. You need good local public transport. O…

I think this is the core of the issue. People are getting hung up on Madrid -> Berlin and coming up with things like New York -> San Francisco as a comparison. I don't know how many people regularly need to go 6 states across a vast continent... Really, what it seems the discussion should focus on is those shorter (but still quite long!) journeys that people would likely want to do. Train lines in California seem to…

In terms of a sane transpiration policy, what you should actually do is have a priority list of focus or a reverse pyramid.

1. Walking (including wheel chair and friends)

2. Biking (including some slow electric stuff)

3. Rail based transport (trains, metros, trams as appropriate)

4. Buses

5. Private vehicles

Post reply on HN