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

491–500 of 654 posts

Re: Europe is investing heavily in trains

#491

Post by alkonaut »

missedthecue wrote: post #401
simonsarris wrote: post #10

Earlier quoted context omitted.

This is mentioned near the end of the article but the reason those short domestic flights are so cheap in Europe is that commercial kerosene is currently tax exempt in every single EU member state. Jet fuel is cheaper per gallon in the EU than it is in the USA! (or was, before the current war) In typically tax-happy Europe this always struck me as odd, agree it is sad when you find out an airplane ticket is cheaper t…

A Boeing 737 consumes 2.28 L/100 km per seat. Fuel prices would have to go parabolic before airline tickets approached rail ticket prices (nevermind the time rail takes, even on the fastest routes)

I pay more than 100% fuel tax in my car, so a doubling for plane fuel doesn't seem so strange.

Re: Europe is investing heavily in trains

#493

Post by reacharavindh »

locallost wrote: post #426

After reading some of the comments on the price of train tickets, and while it's true trains are on paper more expensive, there are some things to consider: * prices and conditions vary between countries. For example, in Germany your children can travel for free until 14, but apparently this is not universal and it can be a big difference for families * in a lot of countries you can pay for discount cards and get 25/…

I love the experience of travelling in Europe by train, but it certainly is cumbersome and expensive.

I took a car train from Hamburg to Vienna last year. Drive the car into the train, and get a sleeping coach for the 14 hour journey - as comfortable a journey I could ask for. Except it cost about €1000 if I remember correctly for my family. I still preferred it because it negated the need to rent a car in Austria, and also saved in baggage costs on a flight. However, if trains could be scaled up, the costs would come down and become competitive even for people who aren’t needing those perks like baggage and car transport.

The train (and tracks) are not as compatible across Europe as I thought. You can travel from Denmark to Austria by train, but be ready to change from Danish train to German, to Austrian train because of different track or signaling systems. Now, the anxiety is on the passenger to not miss a connection at each of those countries (sometimes at the middle of the night).

If EU regulated the train system as a continent, and brought in a whole “European rail system” and not just a ticketing system that works with individual country systems, that would be the beginning of rail as a great transport option. I still have hopes that it’d happen. I just wish it will happen sooner and in my life time.

Re: Europe is investing heavily in trains

#494

Post by bytehowl »

mpol wrote: post #488
locallost wrote: post #426

After reading some of the comments on the price of train tickets, and while it's true trains are on paper more expensive, there are some things to consider: * prices and conditions vary between countries. For example, in Germany your children can travel for free until 14, but apparently this is not universal and it can be a big difference for families * in a lot of countries you can pay for discount cards and get 25/…

One other thing that is easily forgotten, trains are much safer and feel safer. In road traffic there are maybe 50 deaths per year per million people (wild guess, but not that far off). With trains in Europe, it's not even 1 per year per million. I don't have to think about all the "almost-accidents" that are part of road traffic. This does come with a price, but buying a newer and safer car also comes with a price.

A better metric is deaths per unit of distance travelled. I don't have the numbers, though.

Re: Europe is investing heavily in trains

#495

Post by LargoLasskhyfv »

Manuel_D wrote: post #316
adgjlsfhk1 wrote: post #286

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Given that trains need tracks, why is it significant added infrastructure to have wires?

You have to put up wires and a bunch of posts. Googling around, cost estimates are $4.8 million per track-mile [1]. At 140,000 track miles in the US that's $672 billion to electrify the railway network. Especially if hydrogen becomes very cheap through something like generation through waste-heat from nuclear power plants, hydrogen propulsion may make more sense. 1. https://www.freightwaves.com/news/is-electrifying-t…

Peanuts. Just one wasted war less, and it is there.

Re: Europe is investing heavily in trains

#496

Post by Tade0 »

ithinkso wrote: post #54
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.

It's different in Poland. Here, everyone always complains about the rail and it was shit like you wouldn't believe only like 15 years ago. I've been using trains only sporadically but the improvements are absolutely immense, I couldn't believe my eyes. Not perfect of course but holy shit did it improve, especially regional rails Of course we had to improve from much lower standards than Germany, I guess, so I have no…

The fleet is in much better shape(especially refurbished, compartmentless carriages - these are great at limiting antisocial behaviour), but the infrastructure is disappearing in favour of car traffic.

Some cities, like Łomża, lost access to rail entirely (although IIRC it's going to be restored after an over six year hiatus).

I still drive between Wrocław and Warsaw, even though I would rather travel by train, but there's no dedicated track between these cities, so it has to take a long detour, ultimately making the trip take 6h vs 4h point-to-point by train and car respectively.

Re: Europe is investing heavily in trains

#497

Post by fredoliveira »

chrisseaton wrote: post #213
fredoliveira wrote: post #9

Earlier quoted context omitted.

The UK is a European country. Not in the EU anymore, but you folks didn't move continents ;-)

In the UK, 'Europe' in this kind of context has almost always meant 'the continental mainland'. That's not a Brexit thing - that's the terminology for as long as I've been alive.

I see. Makes perfect sense — I appreciate the cultural context.

Re: Europe is investing heavily in trains

#498

Post by CaptainZapp »

nicoburns wrote: post #297
hilbert42 wrote: post #243

Earlier quoted context omitted.

I can't help but feel much of this argument is relative. From my experience (I'm no longer a European resident) almost all of the European rail network that I've traveled on (and that's quite a lot) beats much of the infrastructure in Anglophone countries—and I'm referring to both track and rolling-stock). (...Perhaps my view has been formed by the fact that I've come from a low base in Anglophone countries, so every…

As a UK resident, I can't help but wonder which group you're including the UK in. We're both a European and an anglophone country!

My take: It depends on the line / company. But generally I think the UK is sub standard and extremely expensive compared to continental Europe (expensive, even compared to Switzerland).

Good experience: Virgin first class from London to Manchester. That said, it would have been prohibitively expensive if we hadn't booked the tickets well in advance. Pre-booked and restricted to a specific train they were around 50 quid each. If we would have bought the tickets before boarding the train they weould have been well over 200£ each.

Bad experience: The company that makes my blood boil even thinking about them is Northern. Whenever I have to use them I seriously consider travelling by couch. They are just such an appalling experience and a real sorry excuse for a train company.

Overall I don't think privatization of the railways were a good idea. Not when specific lines are dished out to specific companies and don't allow competition on them.

Re: Europe is investing heavily in trains

#499

Post by LargoLasskhyfv »

mcv wrote: post #473
sva_ wrote: post #465

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Okay I was wrong. I thought it meant something different. > All high speed lines in Germany (ICE) I suppose almost all: https://en.m.wikipedia.org/wiki/ICE_TD

Interesting. That one diesel HST wasn't very successful. It's been taken out of service again and the line is now operated by a slower train again. This seems to suggest that electric trains are more suitable for high-speed lines, although it's not clear why exactly this diesel train didn't perform the way it should.

It was a 'tilting' train(leaning into the curve). Some part of that mechanism was constructed in wrong ways (too thin), which led to partial cracks, which led to partial derailing, trailing sparks. Which led to investigations of all of them, showing more cracks in development. So they have been "grounded" for a while, conventional trains taking over. Then it was deemed safe to operate them in non-tilting, conventional modes, which led to delays. So Deutsche Bahn wanted their money back, and got it. But no tilting diesel-trains.

Re: Europe is investing heavily in trains

#500

Post by muro »

reacharavindh wrote: post #493
locallost wrote: post #426

After reading some of the comments on the price of train tickets, and while it's true trains are on paper more expensive, there are some things to consider: * prices and conditions vary between countries. For example, in Germany your children can travel for free until 14, but apparently this is not universal and it can be a big difference for families * in a lot of countries you can pay for discount cards and get 25/…

I love the experience of travelling in Europe by train, but it certainly is cumbersome and expensive. I took a car train from Hamburg to Vienna last year. Drive the car into the train, and get a sleeping coach for the 14 hour journey - as comfortable a journey I could ask for. Except it cost about €1000 if I remember correctly for my family. I still preferred it because it negated the need to rent a car in Austria, a…

> The train (and tracks) are not as compatible across Europe as I thought.

Th gauge is the same in many countries, but signalling and power is not. Some train engines are ok with it, others are not, train cars are usually fine. They change engines on multi-country trips, but this only takes a few minutes and can be safely ignored. It's still the same train.

Post reply on HN