Live data from Hacker News

Europe is investing heavily in trains

nytimes.com

621–630 of 654 posts

Re: Europe is investing heavily in trains

#621
post #610
post #542

Earlier quoted context omitted.

> With 250km/h average, that would allow up to 1000km. Sadly going through the alps at that speed is not that simple. But I'd love to have interconnected cities.

There are several connections through the alps being built right now. Gotthard base tunnel through Switzerland, Brenner Base Tunnel through Austria/Italy, and a connection Italy/France. Not all connections through Europe go through the Alps, and u can get a decent average speed even if occasionally dropping below the maximum speed for some rough areas.

I am from the alps, so I am quite aware of this. Still, I can go from Berlin to Munich in the same time it takes me to get through half of Austria as of now. The Brenne Base Tunnel is a needed thing (my grandparents live in the area where traffic is currently going through) but by my judgment it will be too little, too late.

Re: Europe is investing heavily in trains

#622

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Absolutely loved taking the train in Italy, fast, convenient, cheap, good amenities. Of course the country very much lends itself for rail (more or less an elongated territory that can run a very fast high-capacity north/south backbone, with slower but more ubiquitous horizontal offshoot rail to the various smaller cities and villages), but it was still very well done. Especially considering how much tunnelling was r…

In my experience, at least neighboring countries tend to be pretty good at selling you international tickets, and most people aren't interested in 17 hours journeys that could be replaced by a 2 hour flight. bahn.de will sell me (through an international website to which they redirect) a ticket from Frankfurt to London via Paris, an 8h40m trip costing 182 EUR one way for a date ~2 weeks out. The real issue is that I'…

> The real issue is that I'm very unlikely to choose this option, no matter how convenient the booking

It's broader than just convenient booking, it's also integrated servicing, scheduling and infrastructure. With integrated scheduling you can get better connecting trains.

> > bahn.de will sell me (through an international website to which they redirect) a ticket from Frankfurt to London via Paris, an 8h40m trip costing 182 EUR one way for a date ~2 weeks out.

Frankfurt to Brussels is 3 hours, Brussels to London is 2 hours. It could be a 5 hour trip if the trains connected, very competitive to the 4-5 hours you mentioned. (And with existing technology the durations could be cut down by 30%). But if there's no connecting trains between the German-Belgian track, and the Belgian-UK track, then it will indeed take 8-9 hours.

I'd definitely rather sit on a train. Relative to airplanes you typically get: - quiet - cheap/available wifi - spacious (leg room, work space) - large windows - easy access to your luggage (for work, food and recreation) - boarding experience that's less frustrating - boarding in a city centre as opposed to a peripheral airport

Price remains an issue, but it's also an issue of scale and value proposition. The Italian trains I've been on were simply vastly superior experiences to whatever flight I ever took and quite cost-competitive. Take Bologna to Napels, it's a 600km route that is 3h 20m by train for just 38 euros, central station to central station. Flights certainly don't win out here. By comparison, Frankfurt to London is 640km as the bird flies. It seems once things start crossing borders and you get into disconnected international tracks, scheduling, ticketing, infrastructure, prices and connections start to suck. But that's in part a solvable issue that can be largely mitigated. If Italy can do a 600km track for 30 euros in 3.3 hours, that should be a attainable across Europe with the proper strategy and investments within 20 years.

There's also the point of pricing in externalities for air flight, not doing so makes them unduly competitive. That's unlikely to last. Some countries are adding 10-20 euros to flight prices this year alone as a start, making 1-2 hour flights less interesting vs trains. Although I've read reports both ways (how flights are undertaxed, as well as how trains are already very subsidised) so I'm not sure on this point.

Re: Europe is investing heavily in trains

#624
post #558
post #409

Earlier quoted context omitted.

0% chance that Germans would tolerate these in their landscapes. Also, how do you think this would work with a train going 400kmh+?

Oh dude, I'm all ears. What else do you think we (germans) think? I'm genuinely interested.

I am German. Most of us hate cables that aren't underground (hence the bad internet connectivity, because it's expensive to upgrade the network underground). Based on that I extrapolated. I presumed the same to be the case for these overhead cables, as I don't usually see them where I live.

https://www.bahnausbau-nordostbayern.de/files/img/Bahnstrom/...

It seems to be a lot more concentrated on the worse side of the rhine river. ;)

Re: Europe is investing heavily in trains

#625
post #343

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Asia often doesn't have any infrastructure in place of air travel. The US and Europe have large roadways and rail networks for transportation which means airfare is more expensive in relation. Much of Asia has no road or rail network in place that can support the capacity that air travel offers and many governments in Asia cannot fund a road or rail project of sufficient magnitude to offer a compelling alternative. I…

EasyJet from Dublin to Milan is so cheap, as are international flights like KL to Taiwan These are distances that aren’t feasible to drive even if they were on the same landmass. And as you say europe also has a dense road network. The fuel tax is interesting, definitely, but in my US/EU comparison price delta is often a factor of five or more.

Flights between KL and Taiwan are cheaper because labor and maintenance is cheap thanks to the much lower wages in KL and Taiwan compared to Europe and the US (so everything from maintenance to refueling is cheaper).

As far as taxes are concerned, it would be interesting to do a cost breakdown of fuel to see how much of the delta comes from taxes.

Re: Europe is investing heavily in trains

#626
post #603

Earlier quoted context omitted.

True, keeping the LH2 below its boiling point is, energetically , strictly cheaper than producing as much new hydrogen as would have boiled off, and then chilling that... But, it incurs the added complexity cost of building refrigeration plumbing into the tank, and maintaining that. That could mean the tank has to be above ground, for easy access (which might be needed anyway). My expectation was that native electric…

Yes, flow batteries, gravity batteries and high water storage will all make their presence felt. Those ~~20-50 tonne bricks they haul and drop would be costly, but I expect them to make them as strong walled brick shapes, with a lower cost fill - be wise to add salt to limit freezing in cold weather.

The bricks, anyway, will not happen. It's the dumbest idea I have run across.

Re: Europe is investing heavily in trains

#627
post #232

Earlier quoted context omitted.

> I'm a little surprised to learn that I take Amtrak more in the US than the average German citizen takes DB Amtrak had 31.3 million passengers in 2016 [1]. That's 0.095 passengers per capita. And that's on all Amtrak trains, while the German number is just for the ICE high-speed trains. Amtrak's high-speed Acela trains only had 3.5 million passengers in 2019 or 0.01 per capita. [2] Per capita is just not a useful nu…

Sure, but Amtrak is a weird comparison since its "real" service area isn't anywhere close to the full population of the US. There's plenty of whole states that don't have an Amtrak station in them. Most EU countries have a much lower median distance to a train station than the US does. I'm not expecting to have them be similar numbers. My original point was purely anecdotal - I usually take 1-3 Amtrak rides a year an…

There are only 4 states with no Amtrak stations

Re: Europe is investing heavily in trains

#628
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…

There's no gauge change. Spain high-speed tracks already use the international one (older tracks still use Iberian gauge). There are already high-speed trains that go to France without stopping at the border.

Right, but that's only if you stick to hi-speed rail. Which isn't a reasonable limitation if you want to travel to Spain more broadly (or, for that matter, from the Netherlands more broadly!)

The point isn't only that there aren't perfectly reasonable routes - there are, and that's great! It's that the overall network is pretty fragmented, and that that does cause issues. If you live in Amsterdam and want to travel to Paris - you're in luck. If you live in Murcia and want to travel to Groningen, you're out of luck. And if you live in the countryside... well, don't even bother.

Re: Europe is investing heavily in trains

#629
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…

Of course technical hurdles can be worked around - the issue is that those workaround often have limitations and consequences. Trains won't be as interchangeable as they might be. Not all trains and all routes will be chosen because they're ideal from the perspective of traveler's logistics, but to stick to technically more feasible routes. There's going to be cost involved in making trains support multiple systems. Electrical systems can convert between voltages, but doing so efficiently, cheaply and robustly isn't that easy, and they'll take space and weight in the train too.

All those factors reduce the overall efficiency of the network, and they help explain why it's so slow and costly to travel large distances by train - much more so than you'd naively expect given modern train speeds.

For instance, I just tried looking for a connection between Groningen,NL and Murcia, ES. The train connection takes 29-30 hours. Adding busses into the mix reduces that time to 23-24 hours. Avoiding high-speed rail entirely and using a car would take ~21h - despite the trains going much, much faster for long stretches of the trip. By contrast, if you take long trips within e.g. France or Germany countries, it's pretty common for the train to be the fastest option.

The interconnections just aren't great, and I bet part of that poor connectivity is due to the fragmentation in the standards involved.

When you assert that these hurdles aren't impossible to take you're of course correct - but that doesn't mean the hurdles are irrelevant either.

Re: Europe is investing heavily in trains

#630
post #167

Earlier quoted context omitted.

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…

> modern powertrains traverse various electrification schemes without difficulty. Indeed, however the majority of currently existing stock is only fitted for operation in at most one or two countries > signaling systems are trending towards ETCS "trending towards" is doing a lot of work here, ETCS rollout has been stalling for ages. New train sets are still being delivered today that do not really support it. Most co…

Exactly - the issue isn't that any of this is unsolvable; these problems are solved, even today. The issue is that those solutions aren't free, and that they do impose limitations on the quality of service.
Post reply on HN