[HN Gopher] Where can you go in Europe by train in 8h?
___________________________________________________________________
Where can you go in Europe by train in 8h?
Author : vortex_ape
Score : 597 points
Date : 2024-12-28 11:43 UTC (1 days ago)
(HTM) web link (www.chronotrains.com)
(TXT) w3m dump (www.chronotrains.com)
| bitschubser_ wrote:
| If you now could just book a train between these cities on a
| common european platform (or local transportation provider...)...
| one could dream...
|
| just booking a train and getting a quote crossing multiple
| borders (without interrail) is just a nightmare :(
| 0xFF0123 wrote:
| Doesn't trainline support some of Europe now?
| sazor wrote:
| Trainline support most of the Europe. Used it from Poland to
| Portugal, not much of a hassle.
|
| It does miss some regional train tickets which could be found
| on local platforms but major lines are covered fine.
| postepowanieadm wrote:
| Wow, that's some voyage. How was it?
| sazor wrote:
| The worst part is Germany as usual. Had to change some
| trains with buses on Gdansk-Berlin route.
|
| Other than that it was quite good and on schedule. I've
| used railpass so it was also cheap enough.
|
| My longest voyage was Moscow-London back in the days when
| Moscow-Berlin and Moscow-Paris trains existed (pre-
| covid).
| atoav wrote:
| As someone who often crosses the borders between Germany,
| Austria and Italy it is basically:
|
| 1. Enter my route at OBB (Austrians), DB (Germans) and
| Trenitalia (Italians) and see who is cheapest
|
| 2. Book one ticket for the whole trip
| MoreMoore wrote:
| Whenever I checked, trains from north Germany to Austria and
| back were always _significantly_ cheaper on the OBB site. It
| was bizarre.
| 4ad wrote:
| It's just price differentiation in action. A Polish ticket
| for the same train can be a third of the price of an
| Austrian ticket. People are rightfully pissed when this
| happens to them online, yet they seem to accept it for
| trains. I don't understand it.
| IncreasePosts wrote:
| Strange, I don't usually hear Austrians complain when
| they get paid 3x for the same job a person does in
| Poland.
| rrr_oh_man wrote:
| Do they, though? In 2024/2025?
| epolanski wrote:
| A bit more than twice.
| 4ad wrote:
| Austrians moving to Poland doing any specific job will pe
| paid exactly the same as the Polish. Similarly a Pole
| working a job in Austria is paid the same as an Austrian
| doing the same job.
|
| The fact that there might be a wage difference between
| different countries might be interesting, but it us
| utterly irrelevant to the fact that there is a price
| difference between tickets sold _for the exact same
| train_. Not an Austrian vs. a Polish train -- literally
| the same actual train with the same finite, exact seats
| for sale.
| postepowanieadm wrote:
| Really? When traveling from Poland to Germany, it's
| cheaper to buy a ticket from DB.
| 4ad wrote:
| I suppose it varies from case to case. I've only done
| Austria<->Poland, with tickets bought from AT/CZ/PL.
| gherkinnn wrote:
| Trainline works well enough including refunds, seat selection,
| etc.
|
| It can't book the Eurostar as part of a larger trip and there
| might be similar limitations.
| bitschubser_ wrote:
| Wow thanks for the hint, I did not know trainline it even
| shows the connections I'm searching for where trainitalia,
| sbb and DB failed :)
| bpye wrote:
| Of course - they add their own fees, though I guess there's
| nothing wrong with using them to find a route.
| jazzyjackson wrote:
| I had a good experience earlier this year on a
| Paris/Berlin/Vienna/Venice/Stuttgart/Paris loop using
| raileurope.com and nightjet.com
|
| I guess it may be more expensive but I don't mind, I find the
| booking experience very clear cut as to what is refundable,
| what is nonrefundable etc, easy to pick which class for each
| segment and so on. no complaints.
| sloowm wrote:
| You can thank all local train operators for this. They have
| been fighting a shared ticketing system tooth and nail at the
| European level and the weak politicians in Europe who don't
| push for a shared system.
|
| There is a legislative proposal but that will take years and
| operators are going to try and get around it:
| https://www.europarl.europa.eu/legislative-train/spotlight-J...
| JoshTriplett wrote:
| What is the _rationale_ for fighting a unified system? A
| unified system would make it _easier_ to travel by train,
| which should in theory encourage people to do so _more_.
|
| Is this a problem of the operators within each country not
| wanting to be unified with _each other_ because then they 'd
| have to compete more directly? Or is this actually the
| operators between countries fighting over it for some reason?
| IncreasePosts wrote:
| Why isn't there a Google flights for trains? Do the operators
| hoard their data?
| OJFord wrote:
| ..Google Maps? (Or Citymapper, or ...)
| rrr_oh_man wrote:
| In the end you'll just have to buy 3-4 different tickets that
| become obsolete once you lose your connection in Koln.
| folmar wrote:
| Not needed, at least in most Europe. Operators share data and
| you can get timetable information from any of them for all
| trains, including combined itinearies, and the expectation is
| you get information from your local train company.
| vertan wrote:
| All Aboard is doing this, check them out:
| https://allaboard.eu/book
| postepowanieadm wrote:
| Given that the majority of the railway companies are state
| owned one could think that integrating them would be a easy
| thing for the EU to do.
| folmar wrote:
| You can (except for Germany I think, that stopped accepting the
| tickets issued from international tariff book few years ago),
| but this will get you the base price, without any possible
| discounts, so is usually way more expensive than tickets bought
| directly. But gives you tickets with date change/cancellation
| possible.
| Svip wrote:
| Title shared on HN left me somewhat disappointed. The actual time
| appears to be "Where can you go by train in 8h?", though that's
| somewhat less clear. It only seems to include central stations of
| larger cities, though I was hoping for a list of shortest travel
| times between stations in Europe, as more of a thought/data
| experiment. Or put another way; which two train stations in
| Europe have the least distance between them?
|
| Anyway, the shared feature is neat, but seems to be somewhat iffy
| once you get out of the bigger cities. If a route has 2 or more
| connections, it seems to struggle to show them. While true to its
| message, I still feel the restriction of 8 hours misses sleeper
| trains, where travel time is less essential compared to daytime
| trains.
|
| It's cute for discoverability, but for a specific train search, I
| would definitely defer to bahn.de, which basically includes all
| train stations in Europe.
| withinboredom wrote:
| My one and only sleeper train experience involved being woken
| up at 3am by police with guns to check passports. Never again.
| casenmgreen wrote:
| Which route was this?
| lionkor wrote:
| My one and only 6 hour sleeper train was in Russia. It was
| cozy, amazing views at night, and they wake you when your
| destination is coming up.
|
| I think when you share anecdotes like yours, its good to
| share anecdotes like mine, to balance it out :)
| leobg wrote:
| Which route? Does it still exist?
| chupasaurus wrote:
| 6 hours is too short for any special trains (i.e. #001/2
| is Moscow - St.Petersburg 8 hour night train) so you can
| expect that at any route, also attendants have to wake up
| passengers by a rule.
|
| Added: GP is probably talking about a train that didn't
| cross a border.
| lionkor wrote:
| I believe it was Krasnodar to Sochi, along the sea, so
| you'd wake up and look out and see nothing but ocean on
| one side.
|
| This was like two years ago or so, so still exists
| probably
| TypingOutBugs wrote:
| I just took a sleeper train last night from Helsinki to the
| arctic circle and they had non-reclining seats with no light
| dimming. Got around an hours nap between 6am and 7am this
| morning. Took around 14 hours to go 1000km. Very much regret
| not paying for a proper cabin...
| Freak_NL wrote:
| Yeah, that's sleeper train travel 101. Either be young and
| not too tall and on a budget, or pay for a private cabin.
| CalRobert wrote:
| To counter that, the best sleeper train I ever took was from
| Beijing to Shanghai, and it felt like I'd travelled to the
| future (this was in 2008).
|
| Second best might be Portland, OR to Sacramento, though I
| might have liked it if had been more like travelling to the
| past (I miss proper dining cars).
|
| European ones have been cheap, cheerful, and uncomfortable,
| but this was 15 years ago for trips like Florence to Prague,
| IIRC.
| TypingOutBugs wrote:
| The Zephyr route from San Francisco to Chicago still has a
| proper dining cart, viewing cart, and is 52 hours long.
| Surprisingly comfortable and the only way you can access
| the Ruby Canyon in Colorado outside of a kayak.
| Gare wrote:
| > I was hoping for a list of shortest travel times between
| stations in Europe, as more of a thought/data experiment. Or
| put another way; which two train stations in Europe have the
| least distance between them?
|
| You mean most distance you can travel in X hours?
| Svip wrote:
| When I posted, the title on HN was "Shortest distance between
| stations in Europe", so it had nothing to do with "X hours".
| jorams wrote:
| > I was hoping for a list of shortest travel times between
| stations in Europe, as more of a thought/data experiment. Or
| put another way; which two train stations in Europe have the
| least distance between them?
|
| That would not be very interesting. I live close to a train
| station that's less than 5 minutes (by train) away from the
| nearest other train station. The other train station is the
| city hub with many connections to other cities. There is
| nothing interesting about this connection, it simply replaces a
| 20 minute bike or bus ride. There are many such connections.
| Svip wrote:
| I assume if you only observe the data in isolation. But
| compiling that data would provide an image of where the
| density of stations are higher. Again, we can assume that's
| probably around the bigger cities, but until we actual lay
| out the data, we are just assuming. Maybe it'll prove the
| data right, but maybe it will reveal something we didn't
| expect. Testing the obvious sometimes lead to unobvious
| observations.
| aprilthird2021 wrote:
| There is a website I love for seeing how to get almost everywhere
| in Europe by train: https://www.seat61.com/
| elygre wrote:
| And it gives details about everything you could imagine. It's a
| gold mine for train travel through Europe!
| ricardonunez wrote:
| He is a legend.
| kgeist wrote:
| I don't understand how it works. First time clicking on Poland,
| it showed a kind of a heat map around some city. Then I click on
| another location and nothing happens. OK, there's a "back"
| button, I go back, click on the map again in a different place
| and... nothing happens. No heat map. At some point in frustration
| I accidentally move the mouse while clicking and the map rotates
| upside down. Don't know, is it me, my browser, or there's
| something about the UI.
| MoreMoore wrote:
| Site is probably just overloaded and it's not responding
| properly because of it.
| alistairSH wrote:
| Select a start city/station. The heat map is destinations
| within the selected duration.
|
| If you pick Paris, most major cities in Western Europe are
| within 8 hours.
|
| Pick Madrid, far fewer destinations are marked.
| numpad0 wrote:
| Focus moves after first click. Second click shows route from
| first click to second click. You have to clear both "where
| from" and "where to" box on left top to return to heatmap mode.
| lysace wrote:
| Yeah - this UX has the potential to be dramatically improved.
|
| I also went through that investigational phase. Needing to do
| that is a very clear sign of a UX that's suboptimally
| designed, IMO.
| OJFord wrote:
| > the potential to be dramatically improved.
|
| I haven't seen the site you're describing, but that's a
| brilliantly optimistic spin of a line!
| lysace wrote:
| Just trying to adapt my normal northern european
| harshness into sunny and positive californian :).
| DoneWithAllThat wrote:
| Since train fans always like to point this out when it comes to
| flying: this is how far you can get in 8 hours _on the train_. It
| doesn't include the time to get to the station, the buffer time
| you need (if your train leaves at 0700 you can't plan to get
| there at 06:59), and the time to travel from the destination
| station to your actual destination. Actual travel time for an 8
| hour train ride is probably at least closer to 10 hours if not
| more.
| Scrapemist wrote:
| How is this different when flying?
| madcaptenor wrote:
| If anything it's less of an issue with trains than with
| flying - time from the street to the vehicle and vice versa
| is smaller with trains, and train stations are generally less
| remote than airports.
| ghaff wrote:
| It's not but a lot of people tend to write it off for trains
| because it's often city center to city center with no
| security. So it can be (usually is) at least less overhead.
| Kwpolska wrote:
| You can board a train within a few minutes of the departure
| time. You can just enter the train station and walk to the
| train you want to take. Train stations tend to be in the city
| center, where it's very easy to get to.
|
| Boarding an airplane ends a long time before the planned
| departure time. You need to go through security and border
| control. Airports tend to be in remote locations.
| numpad0 wrote:
| More startup/shutdown overhead in exchange for bigger peak
| velocity
| Svoka wrote:
| also, you can take overnight trains. I find it very
| comfortable - you wake up and enjoy your day in some nice
| town, then go back home. Great weekend getaway without really
| spending awake time on travel, airports, security etc
| timomaxgalvin wrote:
| The point this it out because it is true of flying. It isn't
| true of trains.
|
| Most trains you can board up to the departure time. There no
| need to be there more than 5 minutes before. The also take you
| to the city centre, which is probably both where you are coming
| from and where you are going to.
| matwood wrote:
| > if your train leaves at 0700 you can't plan to get there at
| 06:59
|
| True, but 6:50 is plenty early enough depending on if you know
| the station and the size.
|
| Getting to and from the stations are a wash because it's not
| like the airport drops you at the door either. Though, many EU
| cities have the train station near the city center which makes
| it easier for people to get to than the airport.
| FartyMcFarter wrote:
| > True, but 6:50 is plenty early enough
|
| I don't think so. That gives you a 10 minute margin, which
| can get uncomfortable quickly if there are any delays in
| getting there.
|
| If I can walk to a station and I know the route, 10 minutes
| margin is plenty enough. But if I have to drive+park or take
| public transport, I won't trust a 10 minute margin.
| louthy wrote:
| If there's a train every 30 mins then sure it's worth
| optimising, missing a train isn't like missing a flight
| most of the time.
| FartyMcFarter wrote:
| That is only true in the simplest scenario of taking a
| train on a flexible ticket and without any transfers.
|
| As soon as you have transfers in the mix (as you often
| would if travelling longer distances) or stricter
| tickets, not making it to the train is usually a really
| bad option.
| macintux wrote:
| Can we at least agree that for better or worse, train
| stations are typically smaller, faster to navigate, and
| missing significant security bottlenecks that cause
| significant delays in accessing airplanes?
| FartyMcFarter wrote:
| That's not what we were discussing, but sure I'd agree
| with that.
| Symbiote wrote:
| It really depends on the route.
|
| When searching a journey, it's easy to see if the route
| with connections repeats every 20, 30, 60 minutes or
| something else.
|
| Stricter tickets mattering or not depends on the country.
| throw646577 wrote:
| It's also true of transfers (changes) on routine journeys
| in most of the world I would have thought. Because almost
| all services are regular. It is the arrival time at your
| destination you build time into, then you work backwards,
| right?
|
| IMO booking strict tickets (e.g. booking a seat) makes
| sense on only a small handful of routes in the UK, for
| example, and may even result in you being offered fewer
| possible options.
|
| There are some quite infrequent routes in rural areas
| where missing a connection is a bigger problem, but on
| those journeys I tend to consider my arrival time at that
| connection to be the starting point.
|
| For the train journeys I take it's pretty normal to have
| two or three changes, often including a trip across
| London. I rarely get into a situation where missing a
| train is a problem, because of the nature of the train
| timings. The last time I was delayed significantly was
| due to catastrophic flooding.
|
| The fundamental difference between air travel and train
| travel is that missed flights have to be rescheduled.
| Missed train journeys, not so much. In the UK if you miss
| the train you had booked a seat on, you can usually still
| travel on another one if it's a travel period covered by
| your ticket (e.g. only travelling at peak with a peak
| ticket). You just don't get a seat guarantee.
|
| ---
|
| An aside:
|
| Train travel is a flow state/mindset thing. Get one train
| earlier than you strictly need, find something to do
| while you're on the train (bonus points for something you
| can still do while standing). And then try to remember
| your journey is no more important than anyone else's,
| maybe a lot less, and you have no more right to
| timeliness or expedience than anyone else... maybe a lot
| less. As long as your journey is progressing, things are
| fine.
|
| The other week I was on a train and there was a thirty-
| something woman and her parents, taking up a lot of space
| around me and chatting incessantly and being silly, and I
| was just about to performatively put my headphones on
| (the rudest you're allowed to get when people are
| crossing the threshold of appropriate levels of noise)
| when it dawned on me that they were being silly because
| this thirtysomething woman was going to a hospital to
| find out whether her tumour had returned. And then it
| dawned on me from their route-planning discussion _which_
| hospital it likely was, and what that likely meant for
| her, and I hugged myself and read my book.
|
| I was on a train about 15 years ago, on a local journey,
| that was held outside a station about three quarters of a
| mile from where I worked. Stuck for _three hours_ on a
| cold train in winter with no working toilet.
|
| About an hour and a half in, people were getting very
| angry, until a member of the rail staff walked the line
| back to the train, boarded, and went through the carriage
| explaining carefully but respectfully exactly _why_ the
| train couldn 't get into the station and why we couldn't
| all walk along the track. Once they knew why, the angry
| people started chatting and sharing snacks and talking to
| strangers like they were old friends for whom life had
| suddenly become too short to be angry.
| timomaxgalvin wrote:
| You don't need a new ticket if you miss you transfer. You
| only have t be on time for the first train, which is
| probably waking distance in most cases.
| mrweasel wrote:
| Unless you don't happen to live within the city center. Train
| stations frequently have zero long term parking, while
| airport frequently have cheap or even free long term parking.
| If you need to take the train where I live, then you're
| better of driving to the airport and park there. Then take a
| train or bus to the city center and the train station.
|
| I did like to take the train more often, but travel times are
| just to slow. I'd need to set aside one day to just leave the
| country, then maybe I can get another train somewhere in
| Germany and then I can get pretty much anywhere in Northern
| Europe in a reasonable time. It's just that train travel in
| Denmark absolutely suck and is fairly pointless and you
| almost never travel more than 80-90kph.
| Kwpolska wrote:
| Most transit systems tend to optimize getting to the city
| center. Getting to the airport is usually harder.
| CalRobert wrote:
| What airport in Europe has cheap or free long term
| parking?!??
| mrweasel wrote:
| Aalborg in Denmark used to be free, but is now ~24 USD
| for 8 days, $3 per started 24 hours. Parking by the train
| station is at least $30+ per day.
|
| Billund is $45 for a week and Copenhagen is $70 for a
| week. That covers the three busiest Danish airports.
| Parking is cheap, especially compared to the time save by
| taking the plane.
|
| I get its different from country to country and I guess
| I'm just really annoyed with the continued insisting that
| trains are better than planes, when there's almost no
| benefit to trains in my country. They are practically
| pointless, out matched by busses, planes and cars, unless
| you just happen to have a usage pattern that fit exactly
| with the layout and timetables.
| edwinjm wrote:
| Schiphol Amsterdam is EUR 124 for to weeks (EUR 8,26 per
| day). Not cheap, but for many people cheaper than taking
| a taxi.
| CalRobert wrote:
| I wonder how many people taxi to the airport? I take the
| train, but I admit I live near a train line with good
| service to Schiphol.
| sloowm wrote:
| I'm not sure what the situation is in Denmark and guess you
| live in a less populated area. But if you travel by train
| you would ideally take public transport to the main hub. A
| decent network would connect you to a fairly big hub within
| 45 minutes. If you really live in the outskirts there
| should be some sort of hub where you can go by car.
|
| In Denmark specifically the border policy causes some
| slowdown. Other than that it probably has the same issue as
| the Netherlands where the trains that go across the border
| are infrequent and don't connect to major hubs. This
| creates a lot of friction in the entire network which makes
| the entire proposition fall apart. If you have to cross
| more than one border you really get into some hellish
| territory, speaking from experience.
| grues-dinner wrote:
| > airport frequently have cheap or even free long term
| parking
|
| Airport parking in Europe is pretty expensive. It could
| quite possibly be more than the flights for all passengers
| combined. A week at Brandenburg is about EUR150 Euros and
| at Heathrow is roughly the same (and needs a shuttle bus to
| the terminal, or it is over PS250 plus for the short stay).
|
| That is, however, still likely cheaper than a train to the
| airport in the UK and substantially less likely to have a
| cancellation cause you to miss a flight.
| ghaff wrote:
| That's within the range for major airports in thee US as
| well. Whether I drive in (rarely) or get a private car,
| it's not hard to spend as much on going to and from the
| airport as it is for the flight. There are more budget
| options but they're not great for me.
| JoshTriplett wrote:
| > Unless you don't happen to live within the city center.
| Train stations frequently have zero long term parking,
| while airport frequently have cheap or even free long term
| parking. If you need to take the train where I live, then
| you're better of driving to the airport and park there.
| Then take a train or bus to the city center and the train
| station.
|
| If you'd have to pay for long-term parking, why not instead
| pay for a taxi or Uber to the train station?
| dr_kretyn wrote:
| Sounds like you're living in an area where the parking at
| the airport is subsidized because other transportation
| options are suboptimal, likely because the airport is
| prioritized. I lived in many places in the EU and North
| America, and nowhere airport parking was cheap. Unless
| going for a day or two, it's cheaper to take a taxi both
| ways.
| throw646577 wrote:
| > if your train leaves at 0700 you can't plan to get there at
| 06:59
|
| Millions of train commuters in the UK optimise for just this
| sort of thing. Not one minute before, because the doors
| typically close 30s to a minute before departure, but 06:55 for
| sure.
|
| I am not a commuter, but later in the day I don't leave the
| house much earlier than twelve minutes before the train I want
| to get will leave the station, which is a third of a mile away
| on foot, and I will have time to get a ticket from the machine.
| Symbiote wrote:
| For a one-off journey with limited flexibility, I would
| normally plan to be at the station 15 minutes prior to
| departure.
|
| If it's a train that runs every half hour or so, and my
| ticket is flexible (which is common) I might cut that to 5 or
| so.
| skerit wrote:
| And if you need to catch some connecting trains, forgot about
| connections that are less than 15 minutes apart.
| chmod775 wrote:
| I always just arrive 5 minutes prior to departure. If I miss a
| train, not a big deal. I'll just take the next one sometime
| later. Most train tickets are flexible and merely specify the
| day you're going to take a particular connection. You might
| miss out on your seat reservation though.
|
| Also I might just be unlucky that it takes me >1h just to get
| from my apartment to the airport in Berlin, but generally
| trains beat airplanes for most destinations I have in Germany.
| For some destinations they're competitive, but rarely ever beat
| trains by more than a few minutes, while still being much more
| of a hassle. I'd rather relax in a comfortable train for 4
| hours with every amenity I could wish for, going straight from
| city center to city center, than deal with airports for two
| hours just to spend an hour in a cramped airplane while still
| having to organize transportation between the airport and the
| city each leg.
| pjmlp wrote:
| Good luck doing that in Iberian Penisula trains.
| CalRobert wrote:
| Train stations tend to be in the middle of the city, or close
| to it, while airports are a ways out. I also don't deal with
| bag check, security lines, etc. on the train.
| orwin wrote:
| my wednesday morning train is at 0654 and i arrive by bike
| between 0650 and 00652.
| pjmlp wrote:
| Also luggage, not all wagons are built to accommodate the
| typical set of plane luggage, unless one is a hand baggage
| traveller.
| helsinkiandrew wrote:
| Another interactive map called chronotrains was discussed here in
| 2022, the original site is no longer available so I'm not sure if
| it is the same project just monetized.
|
| https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=32276017 (439 comments)
|
| In my view the previous version easier to use and more fun. Some
| similar projects:
|
| https://www.mapnificent.net/
|
| https://app.traveltime.com/
| Doohickey-d wrote:
| Another one; where you can get to without changing trains, and
| how long it takes: https://direkt.bahn.guru/
| pbhjpbhj wrote:
| Is this actual train journeys, including time traversing
| stations, or is it concatenated journey times? I think it might
| be the former, as Bristol to Paris was 4h40, Bristol to Reims was
| 5h52, but Paris to Reims was 46 mins. Similarly, Brussels to
| Cologne/Koln 1h48, Brussels to Berlin 6h05, but Berlin to Koln
| 4h02. Not much different, but still enough to pique my curiosity.
|
| FWIW the city straplines/blurbs were in English for me but the
| discount details [adverts?] were in French.
|
| Seems to be based on
| https://github.com/juliuste/direkt.bahn.guru, the issues of which
| note quite a few missing stations.
| ianbicking wrote:
| I notice if you look at Madrid it includes all of Spain and
| none of Portugal, and similarly from Lisbon. I assume this is
| because the schedules don't line up, because it wouldn't really
| make sense in terms of physical distance.
| pjmlp wrote:
| There are hardly any connecting trains between both
| countries.
|
| The connection to Vigo happens a few times a day, with
| regional trains, and to Madrid it is at most twice a day, if
| it runs.
|
| Then the regular CP strikes, delays and canceled trains.
|
| It isn't by chance that most families have cars, if we rely
| on trains and bus alone, better have enough time for
| travelling by land.
| ricardonunez wrote:
| About 20 years ago I was in Portugal and remember it was a
| TGV project that didn't take off. It was supposed to
| connect to Madrid I believe. I imagine that politics and
| money created this issue.
| pjmlp wrote:
| That keeps being discussed and filling pockets from
| politicians and their close friends.
|
| We could already have good connections with Alpha
| Pendular trains, it would be a matter to extend and
| improve existing infrastructure, not build a new one from
| scratch.
|
| Same goes for the never ending story of the new Lisbon
| airport, it will make very happy everyone involved into
| its construction.
| notahacker wrote:
| I suspect the time traversing stations is an arbitrarily small
| wait time rather than actual typical connection intervals.
| Looks like they map based on the fastest train (even when
| that's once a day and the others take about 50% longer) and the
| assumption that if I walked from the station instead of
| boarding the train I could still get ~9 miles away by walking
| across open fields seems generous...
| portaouflop wrote:
| In Germany not so far because the train will be 2+ hours late
| jillesvangurp wrote:
| Literally happened to me yesterday on the way back to Berlin. I
| arrived 2 hours late. In fairness there was what was labelled
| "a personal accident" on the track, which is a euphemism for
| somebody jumping in front of a train. Which unfortunately
| happens and needs to be dealt with properly and is not really
| something anybody can do much about.
|
| But delays are fairly common on that particular route (Berlin-
| Amsterdam). They use really old trains and they break down once
| in a while. Or the track is down for maintenance. Or whatever.
| Most of my journeys in the last three years there's always
| something. Before that it was more reliable.
| portaouflop wrote:
| Privatisation was a mistake - it's only gone downhill since
| they are able to make profit and cut costs.
|
| We need to get essential services such as public transport
| back under state control or the quality will continue to
| deteriorate
| ben_w wrote:
| Agreed.
|
| Learn the lesson from the UK, who did privatisation first*
| and have witnessed things much worse than the current state
| of German trains (which are still _*excellent*_ in
| comparison, and I say that as one who moved from the UK to
| Germany in 2018).
|
| * or "harder", to the extent that German rail privatisation
| never went as far as in the UK. I understand there's a
| constitutional requirement here in Germany for government
| majority ownership of the rail system -- I wish it were so
| in the UK
| zelos wrote:
| To be fair though, it's not like the trains were exactly
| great in the UK _before_ privatisation.
| lewiscollard wrote:
| Yes, I find it difficult to understand why anyone old
| enough to remember what British Rail actually was (or
| capable of e.g. reading Wikipedia, to find out what it
| was), would like British Rail to be resurrected in
| anything like the form it had. It feels like pointless
| nostalgia most of the time; double arrows, rail blue, and
| jumpers for goalposts.
|
| And like, if one's model for maintaining a system depends
| on having a sensible government in power, _regardless of
| which particular political party you think is least
| competent_ you are going to have a rail system being run
| incompetently at least half the time. That's also what we
| got with "privatisation", of course; why would we expect
| any different?
| chgs wrote:
| British rail was a joke before privatisation. Now the
| complaint is mainly around the cost of popular trains,
| and the performance of state run franchises like northern
| ben_w wrote:
| Shortly after privatisation, the Conservatives who did it
| lost power; it was going "so well" that the
| Conservatives' own choice of advertising posters in 2001
| included "You paid the tax so where are the trains?"*, an
| irony I remember well because I was into writing letters
| to the newspaper editor at the time and my letter about
| it was published.
|
| The main joke (there have been many smaller ones) for the
| last ~ decade has been the Brighton-London route, and two
| decades ago my trains home from Aberystwyth were getting
| cancelled _every time_ a few stops before the Birmingham,
| with people saying that was to avoid getting counted as
| late.
|
| * https://www.alamy.com/one-of-posters-from-the-
| conservative-p...
| panick21_ wrote:
| Privatization has little to do with it in German. 'Die
| Bahn' is 100% public.
|
| We should actually identify the actual technical problems
| and focus on spending the money to fix them.
| epolanski wrote:
| I disagree here, privatization is good as there's more
| competition.
|
| It's really good we have Italo in Italy.
|
| Prices are down, service quality is up.
| chgs wrote:
| In the U.K. it's grey, you can choose a service from
| London to Manchester that's far faster than pre
| privatisation for a reasonable off peak fee, or you can
| choose a slower service with a change at crewe which
| costs far less than under British Rail and take about the
| same time (3h30)
|
| Under nationalisation plans were afoot to close
| Marylebone, today Chiltern is one of the highest rated
| services going
| sloowm wrote:
| There are things that can be done about people jumping in
| front of trains. Making sure the rails are not accessible
| with fences around them. Putting camera's at spots where
| people can get past the fences. In high risk stations you can
| put walls and gates in that only open when a train can be
| boarded.
|
| It's all just a lack of investment. If the budget for rail
| and other infrastructure matched the budget for car
| infrastructure rail would be way better than cars.
| Freak_NL wrote:
| > In high risk stations you can put walls and gates in that
| only open when a train can be boarded.
|
| That is only possible with fully standardized train units.
| Which is why you will see this in subways and dedicated
| high speed networks, but not on the common rail net.
| Platforms on a larger railway station have to accommodate a
| range of trains, from metro services (many doors at shorter
| intervals), to intercity trains (fewer doors, longer
| carriages), to special trains like night trains (a bunch of
| carriages from different ages strung together) and rented
| locomotives with spare carriages to fill gaps in the roster
| caused by late delivery of new trains.
|
| > Making sure the rails are not accessible with fences
| around them.
|
| There will always be spots where the rails are somewhat
| accessible outside of built-up areas.
|
| Besides, all of that is fighting symptoms. Spend the same
| money on prevention and you'll have much more impact.
| sloowm wrote:
| Makes sense why I've not seen gates in many places but
| metro networks and high speed.
|
| I agree that there will always be spots where the rails
| can be reached. As with many parts of human behavior, if
| there is more friction less people will do the thing.
| Since there are many instances where this is a temporary
| state and seeking and finding help can always be
| difficult I think creating that frictions is also
| worthwhile. Making sure people are prevented from feeling
| suicidal and being happier is something I also fully
| support.
| throwaway20241 wrote:
| (throwaway for obvious reasons)
|
| CW: suicide
|
| Coming from someone who has spent considerable time
| thinking about and planning suicide by train: lol no
|
| Unless you put up walls higher than the highest ladders
| available (so at least 5m I guess) or completely enlose
| every train track with a roof and everything, people will
| climb over things. There's either no space for large fenced
| areas around tracks (pretty much everywhere near
| civilization) or you're too far out for somebody to respond
| before a determined person can reach the track. And of
| course, nobody will permit the construction of the
| necessary infrastructure (call them NIMBYs if you want).
|
| Every escape door can be used to enter tracks. Make them as
| secure as you want them - keys are easier to get then you
| think.
|
| Rebuilding train stations to completely secure access to
| the tracks would involve standardizing all trains in every
| country in all of Europe.
|
| And (not applicable for high-speed trains) unless you want
| to spend billions and years to rebuild every train crossing
| to bridges, it will be impossible to completely secure the
| tracks.
|
| Most train suicides are impulsive decisions and can be
| prevented with better infrastructure. But if suicide by
| train is too difficult, I'll just jump on front of a car
| instead, or from a bridge, etc. "It's all just a lack of
| investment" so is terra forming Mars. But spend a fraction
| of this for better mental health and you can prevent many
| more suicides.
| Aachen wrote:
| (Without derailing the topic, I hope you are doing better
| now! You sound level headed and like someone we want in
| this world or on our jobs or in our friend groups.)
|
| I mostly figured the same as what you said (way too much
| infrastructure needed to mostly eliminate the
| possibility), though if you say most suicides are impulse
| decisions, wouldn't preventative infrastructure in a few
| key spots be sufficient to shave, idk, 10+% off the
| number of suicides by train?
| lagadu wrote:
| Even if it did prevent 10% of suicides by train, it
| stands to reason that a huge portion of those 10% would
| simply become suicides by jumping off a bridge.
| ascorbic wrote:
| Studies show that making particular suicide methods
| harder to access is an effective way to reduce overall
| suicide rates. That includes restrictions on poisons and
| firearms, but also physical barriers on bridges and train
| platforms.
| Tainnor wrote:
| DB is just an embarrassment. Yesterday, my direct train from
| Basel to Berlin was cancelled. I had to take a bus to the
| other station in Basel, take another train to Frankfurt, miss
| my connection there and take another one to Berlin - all the
| while, my seat reservation was of course obsolete and
| everything was packed full of people with luggage, even in
| the 1st class.
|
| Sure, you get a little bit of money back, but at that point,
| I understand why so many people prefer to fly or go by car.
| bloak wrote:
| > "a personal accident" on the track, which is a euphemism
| for somebody jumping in front of a train
|
| Removing a body from the track shouldn't take long, of
| course. The problem is if you need to do detailed forensics
| because it might have been a murder. At least, I am guessing
| that's the reason that sometimes a line stays closed for a
| long time with a lot of police vehicles parked in the
| vicinity (here in England), whereas on other occasions there
| is a death but only a few trains are delayed and for only
| 10-30 minutes.
|
| Interestingly, I have on at least one occasion heard about
| trains being held up because of a dead body on the track that
| wasn't hit by a train. That definitely sounds suspicious. But
| of course no further information is given to the general
| public. (Body placed by criminals but reported before it was
| hit or the train happened to be slow enough to stop in time?
| Or suicidal person drugs themselves before placing themselves
| on the track?)
|
| > not really something anybody can do much about
|
| Good video surveillance might help eliminate the need for a
| detailed investigation of the (perhaps) crime scene. But,
| yes, not an easy problem.
| lodovic wrote:
| 10 to 30 minutes isn't nearly enough time. In my country,
| when someone is hit by a train, that train is stopped on
| track and is only allowed to continue after it is fully
| cleaned up. The train company can't risk rolling into a
| crowded station when the front of the train still shows
| evidence of an impact such as having blood on it.
|
| Sometimes the front locomitive gets uncoupled earlier so
| the train can continue on a different track. But the rule
| is that passengers in the train should not be exposed to
| what happened outside the train. It's bad enough that the
| machinist had to witness it.
| eCa wrote:
| In addition to the sibling comment, it is also generally a
| requirement that the crew is changed before the train can
| continue, which also takes a while.
|
| As an aside, I was once on a train that hit a deer-sized
| animal while going through a cutout, which caused the now
| dead animal to bounce back and hit the side of the train.
| The first car had blood smeared all over. When we rolled
| into the next station, there was a collective dropping of
| jaws among the people waiting to board. Yes, there was an
| announcement once they had boarded that it wasn't a person.
| phh wrote:
| In France you can go very far (Paris <=> Barcelona, 1000km in
| 6h47, Lille <=> Barcelona 150km in 8h32), but only in the 30
| biggest cities, and going from/to Paris. If you take two random
| points in the map (or even population), you'll likely not be
| able to do that route in a reasonable amount of time.
| ghaff wrote:
| France is known for being very Paris-centric in terms of
| transportation infrastructure.
| pjmlp wrote:
| And you will lose at least two connections.
| yashap wrote:
| Huh really? Whenever I've taken the train in Germany it's been
| pretty punctual, and looking at the board that's been the case
| for most trains. But maybe I just got lucky and/or it's changed
| over time.
|
| Flakiest trains I've experienced anywhere in Europe were in
| Italy - rolling strikes among train workers are crazy frequent
| and cause so many delays and cancellations.
| yeputons wrote:
| The map claims a journey from Berlin to Bremen takes 2h57m.
| My last one took 6h 33m. And it was only a single connection
| in Hamburg. The Berlin-Hamburg ICE got stuck for a few hours
| in the middle of nowhere, then a few trains from Hamburg to
| Bremen got cancelled... The usual stuff.
| yashap wrote:
| Ah brutal. Has it got worse recently? Been years since I've
| taken the train in Germany, but they used to be pretty good
| IMO.
| yeputons wrote:
| I've heard so. I think my first DB train was around 2019,
| it was another ICE from Berlin to Munich. They've changed
| the train, cancelled all seat reservations as a
| consequence, delayed it for a few hours, I missed my
| connection in Munich... Maybe I'm unlucky :) E.g. I'm
| quite lucky with London trains (never had a
| cancellation/significant delay), but I've heard Cambridge
| residents would love to have a word with me.
| ctenb wrote:
| The geographical information is not 100% accurate. E.g. it labels
| "Enschede" as being in Germany, but it's in the netherlands. Cool
| app though.
| helpfulContrib wrote:
| Enschede is serviced by German rail operators though, so that
| might be a reason. In fact a lot of trains in this region of
| the world are operated by neighboring countries ..
| mattashii wrote:
| > Enschede is serviced by German rail operators though
|
| Yes, there is a train service to Germany, but the majority of
| the connections from Enschede are to/from the Netherlands.
|
| > In fact a lot of trains in this region of the world are
| operated by neighboring countries
|
| If a service to Germany causes the whole station to be
| labeled as German, the website might just as well label
| Berlin as Czech, or Brussels as Dutch: CZ (Czech national
| railway) has train services that extend to at least Berlin,
| and NS (Dutch national railway) has trains to Brussels.
| hagbard_c wrote:
| A rather incomplete list, at least for those starting from Sweden
| which only seems to allow access to neighbouring Scandinavian
| countries according to it. Well, no, I regularly - about once a
| month - take a train from there to the Netherlands, via Denmark
| and Germany. Given the presence of a _Book through Deutsche Bahn_
| button for all trips I 'd expect that option to be available but
| alas, it's Denmark or bust.
| yoavm wrote:
| You take a train from Sweden to the Netherlands in 8 hours?
| From where in Sweden? I've done the Stockholm - Amsterdam route
| a couple of times, and it's usually closer to 16 hours.
| Symbiote wrote:
| Amsterdam is 11 hours from Copenhagen, so from Malmo it's an
| extra 40 minutes or so.
| hagbard_c wrote:
| No, not in 8 hours, in something between 15 and 21 hours.
| What is missing in the list is the fact that you can be in
| Hamburg in about 8 hours, give or take a bit. In other words
| the fact that you can be 'on the continent' within the given
| timeframe.
| Kwpolska wrote:
| Applying some leeway to the numbers would make this a nicer
| experience. There are some destinations which are e.g. 3 hours 2
| minutes away -- they only appear when 4 hours are selected, but
| it would make more sense to show them in the 3h bucket.
| jonplackett wrote:
| Think we killed it - needs to add some caching!
| betaby wrote:
| Meanwhile in Canada https://www.cbc.ca/news/canada/montreal/via-
| rain-passengers-...
| WXLCKNO wrote:
| I'm amazed nobody left that train except for medical
| emergencies.
| tills13 wrote:
| I think in our defense there is simply not enough people and
| towns to support a rail network like this. A shame, really,
| 'cause a WestJet flight from Victoria to Calgary is way more
| expensive than it needs to be and don't even get me started
| about cross-country flights.
|
| I would accept if Via rail was cheaper. I have been looking at
| those cross-country trips and it's literally $4k CAD per
| person. I get that it's accommodation, too, but still.
| bpye wrote:
| Nearly two thirds of Canada's population live within the
| Windsor-Quebec City corridor - some 40 million people.
| Similarly Vancouver, BC - Portland, OR has relatively high
| population density. Population is not the reason for rail
| failing here.
| chgs wrote:
| Americans (and yea Canada is basically America) love to
| point out their vast empty plains.
|
| Truth is that there are millions living in areas which rail
| makes sense but it doesn't happen because they don't want
| it.
| bpye wrote:
| Oops, I meant 25 million people. Point still stands.
| CalRobert wrote:
| Via rail is commonly excoriated by not just bikes. The
| baggage policy seems especially pointless.
| Simon_O_Rourke wrote:
| Would like to see an option for highlighting sleeper train
| routes. Eight hours sitting on a hard plastic seat is not the
| same as that in a bed.
| tzury wrote:
| About 20 years ago, I visited most of Europe's major cities over
| the course of a two-month trip, traveling primarily by night
| train. Each overnight ride saved me the cost of a hostel or
| guesthouse, and I'd arrive in a new city each morning feeling
| refreshed because of the train's sleeping accommodations.
|
| There used to be a similar service between Toronto and Montreal
| (both directions), where the train would pause for several hours
| midway so passengers would arrive at around 7:30 a.m. well-
| rested.
|
| I've taken that route as well, and it's remarkable how much you
| see while traveling by train. You pass through countless towns,
| villages, and beautiful scenery--experiences you simply can't get
| from flying.
| ant6n wrote:
| The state railways have large exited night trains as a form of
| transport, due to economics, although it's a much more
| sustainable form of transportation compared to aviation.
|
| Since Europe has a liberalized market in the rail sector, some
| startups are trying to fill the gap.
|
| European sleeper operates a night train on the route Brussel-
| Amsterdam-Berlin-Prague, using old rented rolling stock.
|
| I'm involved with Luna Rail (in Berlin), which is trying a more
| technical approach around rolling stock design to improve unit
| economics to make Night trains profitable.
|
| There's also a startup in the US, dreamstar, whose primary
| effort appears to be about getting track rights for now
| (something that's not such a big concern in Europe - here the
| barrier is rolling stock).
| endless1234 wrote:
| I'm sure you know of this, but just sharing the map for
| others: https://projectmapping.co.uk/Reviews/Resources/Europe
| %20nigh...
|
| The situation is a lot better today than 10 years ago or so,
| largely thanks to OBB Nightjet. But yep, it's not only state
| railway companies anymore, as can be seen on the map
| sandworm101 wrote:
| >> a much more sustainable form of transportation compared to
| aviation.
|
| Night trains are not like normal trains. They carry far fewer
| passengers per car. That doesn't make them as bad as flying
| on pure CO2 emissions, but night trains are not as efficient
| as "trains" generally. They are more comparable to luxury
| busses. But ... if the other option is an electric car, or
| even an electric aircraft, then even an electric night trains
| will likely no longer win on CO2 emissions.
| lostlogin wrote:
| > night trains will likely no longer win on CO2 emissions.
|
| The comparison is more complicated though isn't it? It
| isn't a comparison with a plane, it's a variable comparison
| with a plane, a taxi, and a hotel etc.
| ant6n wrote:
| Seating rail cars have 70-90 seats, whereas couchettes have
| 40-66 beds, but at lower emissions (lower speed->less drag)
| and higher occupancy (in Germany, occupancy is around 50%
| for day trains). It's pretty much a wash. If you mean
| luxury sleepers, they're worse sure. None of the startups
| are really targeting those luxury/low density levels,
| because of the overall poor impact.
|
| Flying has around 10x the co2eq emissions of trains
| (300g/km, including infrastructure, occupancy). Cars are
| still pretty bad, but also don't compete well for 1000km
| trips in Europe. It's basically only aviation at those
| distances.
|
| Electric airplanes that can do 1000km trips don't exist.
| They may exist one day in significant quantities... but
| perhaps only after we've used up all our carbon budget on
| the path to a 2-3C increase.
| ghaff wrote:
| I've taken a few night trains. They were mostly a fun
| experience, but they weren't in general especially time or
| cost efficient (though you have to factor in saving a night
| of hotel).
|
| It also helps if you're generally going city center to city
| center and aren't lugging large suitcases around. (Which you
| might think would be a better fit for trains but really
| aren't for the most part.)
| physhster wrote:
| I've been wondering how long it would take for a startup to
| figure out how to build train cars for cheaper than the
| incumbents. I know it's hard, but not as hard as building
| airplanes... As long as the authorities agree to certify
| them, and I could see a lot of corruption there.
| ant6n wrote:
| The unit economics for Night trains are in the operation. U
| want your cars to minimize operating cost, which may
| actually make the asset costs more expensive (at least at
| first).
| JBlue42 wrote:
| Curious about the issues you're having with rolling stock.
| Given Germany's industrial prowess, I would've thought that
| that wouldn't be an issue to manufacture, either for domestic
| use or export.
| ant6n wrote:
| For startups, building up the financing for buying rolling
| stock is very difficult. There's currently very little
| available on the rental market.
|
| It's difficult to just do a startup on general in this
| space (it's sustainable mobility, but involves hardware, an
| old industry, old tech).
|
| The state railways can afford rolling stock, but it's
| extensive and takes a long time. They are not too
| innovative either, so may not solve the economics issues
| with new approaches, because they are too conservative.
| JBlue42 wrote:
| Ah, I had interpreted your statements as an issue of
| manufacture and availability, not financing.
|
| As to finance, it does suck that we throw billions at
| economically, socially, and/or globally destructive,
| unprofitable startups and yet something that is a net
| good for society and environment can't get that funding.
| I guess that's where government steps in or
| private/public partnerships.
|
| Good luck though!
| yndoendo wrote:
| I would travel more around the USA if we had a decedent high-
| speed rail system. Spent too much time flying, red-eyes, and
| driving for work, 7-12+ hours one way, and hate those modes of
| transportation. They may get you from point A to B but your
| time is wasted along with the enjoyment of the trip.
|
| Unfortunately the Oil industry won over the politicians in the
| USA with donations, legal bribes, and they prevent the building
| of quality train travel. Bet that if majority of the USA left
| and spent time in countries with quality rail system, they
| attitudes would change dramatically and push for better. They
| would experience how much time they waste in traffic and
| queuing for boarding and de-bordering.
| likeabatterycar wrote:
| Can you provide sources for the Big Oil conspiracy you cite?
| Because nationwide high speed rail isn't as easy - or
| practical - as you think. California hadn't been able to
| build a train a fraction of that distance without delays and
| squandering massive amounts of money.
|
| The PNW has been unable to build it from Portland to
| Vancouver.
|
| The US is many times larger than any European country or
| Japan. There are US states similar in size to EU countries
| with comparable rail networks.
|
| The US literally invented air travel, which made traveling
| long distances by train largely obsolete.
|
| Aircraft aren't limited to where they can go by rails.
|
| So please explain with all these concrete examples of failure
| how it's a corporate conspiracy and not general purpose
| government ineptitude?
| thatcat wrote:
| China, Russia, and India have high speed rail.
|
| Can you cite the reasons that these large countries are
| capable of building high speed rail while the US is not?
|
| Where is the recent innovation in US air travel? It has
| gotten considerably worse over the last 30 years.
| Supersonic passenger flights stopped in 2003 around the
| same time that TSA added hours to every flight.
| Beijinger wrote:
| Policy, The Koch Brothers and "eminent domain" problems
| in the US.
| likeabatterycar wrote:
| > China, Russia, and India have high speed rail. Can you
| cite the reasons that these large countries are capable
| of building high speed rail while the US is not?
|
| One was colonised by wankers for nearly 100 years who
| built the railways, and they have been in maintenance
| mode ever since. The infrastructure is decrepit and
| people still ride on the outside of the trains in some
| cases.
|
| China has basically no safety standards. They can crash a
| train, hose it off without a care, and build a new one in
| its place with no improvements. They continue to have
| construction-related industrial accidents equivalent to
| the 1800s in the West.
|
| Russia is currently under embargo because they started a
| war and can't import parts to properly maintain their
| fleet of modern Western aircraft.
|
| The irony is two of the three countries you mentioned are
| in the top 5 fastest growing aviation markets (India
| being #2).
| badpun wrote:
| Russia hardly has high speed rail, it's just one line
| (Moscow to St. Petersburg) and top speed is just 200 km/h
| for most of the line.
| LAC-Tech wrote:
| 2.5 times faster than any train in my wealthy, western
| country.
| aetherson wrote:
| I don't know which wealthy, western country you live in,
| but to be clear in the US Acela trains get up to 150 mph
| (241 kmh) -- admittedly in a short section, but with
| other sections that have a top speed of 135 mph (217
| kmh). The entire route from Washington to New York has an
| average speed ( _including stops_ ) of 90mph (140 kmh).
|
| Should Acela be faster? Probably! But people should be
| clear-eyed about what the reality of the situation is.
| LAC-Tech wrote:
| New Zealand. You know that place americans fantasize
| about moving to when the newly elected president has the
| wrong colour tie. Trains are 80km/h max.
| EdiX wrote:
| If New Zealand is a western country do you consider
| Canada to be the middle east?
| LAC-Tech wrote:
| I never took the term "western" to be purely geographical
| sokoloff wrote:
| That might be the average _scheduled speed_ , but it's
| not my average _experienced speed_ on Acela, with about
| half the trips seeing significant delays from schedule.
| gcanyon wrote:
| And high speed in India is apparently 100mph/160kph.
| aetherson wrote:
| I mean, the recent innovation in US air travel is that
| the TSA no longer adds hours to every flight. Like, is it
| maddening that we're curing a self-inflicted problem?
| Sure, of course it is. But the railfan community is also
| stuck in 2010. Every flight I've been on in the last 10
| years I've walked through a metal detector, not a
| scanner, I've kept my shoes and belt on, my laptop in my
| bag. It's like 2000 all over again, except that now we
| have to pay a nominal fee every 5 years or whatever it is
| to use PreCheck.
|
| Everyone should be mad that we dug this hole and then
| climbed out of it, but people shouldn't pretend that
| we're still in the hole.
| ghaff wrote:
| I tend to show up fairly early because neither myself nor
| my limo companies like the stress. But the idea that you
| need to show up hours early just isn't true in general.
| mitthrowaway2 wrote:
| Still, we don't put airports in the middle of built-up
| downtown areas, and for good reason. You usually have to
| hail a taxi or bus from an airport, whereas you can step
| out of a (good) train station and be right where you want
| to be.
| aetherson wrote:
| Still nonsense.
|
| Train stations and airports are where they are. Lots of
| them are quite close to downtowns. Others aren't.
| Nobody's changing their locations in existing large
| cities.
|
| There are plenty of cities where the nearest airport is
| closer than the nearest long distance rail station. There
| are plenty of cities where they aren't.
| monkeywork wrote:
| Boston, San Diego, and Wash DC all have airports roughly
| 3 miles outside their main core. Toronto (YTZ) has an
| airport less than 2 miles.
| mitthrowaway2 wrote:
| There are good transit connections from Logan airport,
| but you'd still have to board them. I wouldn't want to
| walk anywhere from the arrivals terminal on foot. Walking
| out of South Station is pretty nice though, lots of
| places I'd want to be nearby.
|
| Billy Bishop is pretty convenient, I think it's quite
| unusual in that respect. But for the same reason, it's
| rather controversial and limited in the airplanes it can
| take, and its future is often in doubt.
| ajmurmann wrote:
| As others have pointed out Russia didn't have high-speed
| rail. The reason is related to the real reason the US
| doesn't have it. It's of course density. Relevant US
| cities are much further apart. You practically need hsr
| to make it practical at all which prevents incremental
| improvement of the train system. I hear that's different
| on the east coast (I've spent very little time there) but
| it certainly sets culture when for most of the country
| trains are a bad option.
| mitthrowaway2 wrote:
| Japan is almost all mountains, it's one of the worst
| geographies to build high speed rail where tunnels and turn
| radii need to be especially large. But they pulled it off
| anyway. The bullet train initially only connected metros
| like Tokyo and Osaka but today runs all the way to many
| remoter areas. The most recently added line connects Fukui
| prefecture, population 780k.
|
| The US has many areas with suitable population density to
| be served by high speed rail, and with more accomodative
| geography than Japan. It's just that in the US, it was
| considered fine to use government funds and authority to
| bulldoze land for the interstate system, but not for high
| speed rail.
| chgs wrote:
| Washington - Atlanta with stops at Richmond, Raleigh,
| Charlotte. I don't understand why this isn't an hourly
| train.
| rpearl wrote:
| > California hadn't been able to build a train a fraction
| of that distance without delays and squandering[??] massive
| amounts of money.
|
| It costs money and time to build HSR. Fine. The J(N)R
| director who ran the shinkansen project literally lied to
| multiple levels of government to shield the (2x+) budget
| overruns. He resigned and then within a year of it opening
| he was given a medal for extraordinary contributions to
| Japan.
|
| > Because nationwide high speed rail isn't as easy - or
| practical - as you think.
|
| Who is claiming that it is easy? However, it is practical!
| It takes 6 hours to drive Tokyo to Osaka; it's 2hr by
| train. Trains leave every 5 minutes.
|
| A west coast HSR network is just obviously practical!
| Beijing-Shanghai HSR is 1300km; SF to Seattle would be the
| same. It'd be 4-5h on a train. Right now it's 2.5 hours on
| a plane plus a recommended 1.5 hours for security and
| boarding plus transfers on each side--I'd rather take a
| high speed train If I could! SF to LA could be ~3h. 90
| minutes on a plane plus lead time and transfer times and
| it's competitive. Again.
|
| > There are US states similar in size to EU countries with
| comparable rail networks.
|
| Oh, which ones?
| ajmurmann wrote:
| I think it's relevant that Shanghai and Beijing are 5x
| the size of SF and Seattle while construction cost are a
| significant upfront barrier and don't go down much by
| needing to service fewer travelers.
| monkeywork wrote:
| >A west coast HSR network is just obviously practical!
| Beijing-Shanghai HSR is 1300km; SF to Seattle would be
| the same. It'd be 4-5h on a train. Right now it's 2.5
| hours on a plane plus a recommended 1.5 hours for
| security and boarding plus transfers on each side--I'd
| rather take a high speed train If I could! SF to LA could
| be ~3h. 90 minutes on a plane plus lead time and transfer
| times and it's competitive. Again.
|
| So just to be clear you are saying at best the time
| difference between flight and HSR would be minimal - so
| where is the payoff for the billions the infrastructure
| would take to build. If it's purely capacity couldn't you
| spend a fraction of the billions you'd spend on the new
| infrastructure to bolster the existing system?
| saagarjha wrote:
| Environment? Comfort?
| monkeywork wrote:
| That's worth the price tag, environmental impact, and
| government land repossession that will be required?
| lotsoweiners wrote:
| I'm not sure about that. I'd imagine that trains are going to
| have the worst of both worlds. They will take a long time
| (closer to amount of time to drive to destination). They also
| will have costs approaching that of a flight. To me a train
| trip makes sense if you enjoy trains and feel that the travel
| itself is part of the reward.
| thatcat wrote:
| Maintenance cost and fuel costs are considerably lower for
| trains, why would they cost the same amount?
| bpye wrote:
| Lower emissions as well, which, I would hope we all care
| about.
| jenadine wrote:
| Why should we? The difference is a drop on the ocean for
| the climate. While choosing convenience/price has a
| immediate impact on yourself. The rational choice at the
| individual level is not to care for such things. Actions
| has to be taken at the political level.
| vineyardmike wrote:
| I'm a 100% supporter of getting nice trains throughout
| America, but trains are relatively expensive for long
| distances. I don't know why, but if you compare ticket
| prices (globally!) its often not cheaper to take a train.
| In my experience, trains are a _superior_ experience, and
| worth spending more on, but generally not cheaper. The
| ultra-low cost airlines (especially outside the US) are
| really hard to compete with on price.
|
| For example, the Shinkansen in Japan (which I totally
| recommend!) is usually over $100 USD. Which is pretty
| similar to a flight price. This pattern repeats in Europe
| as well.
|
| My friend just traveled London -> Edinburgh in the last
| few weeks, and found the train 2x the cost compared to
| RyanAir or EasyJet.
|
| Even in the US, this pattern holds. Seattle -> LA costs
| $50-150 by plane, depending on the airline (3hrs). By
| train, it's 35hrs and $150. Its a lovely train ride, if
| you have a weekend to dedicate.
| sbuk wrote:
| High speed rail in Europe (mainly France) runs at an
| average speed of 270km/h (167mph), usually city centre to
| city centre. It is often more convenient than flying, given
| check-in times and airport distance from cities. It's
| certainly quicker than driving.
| pontifk8r wrote:
| As a US person who has, You need to experience euro train
| travel. The whole experience, from booking using an app to
| waiting for a train. You'll find the apps are good, the
| schedule information accurate and up to date. The apps
| don't do stupid things mostly. When you arrive at the
| station, you'll find it generally clean and well
| maintained. Signage is clear and tied into the train
| information system. Arrival times accurate. You can get a
| nice sandwich if the shop is open. Intercity Trains are
| modern and fast. Lots of power ports to plug in your phone.
| Nice seats. Also great electronic signage in the train. You
| might even have good wifi. You would not be afraid to use a
| bathroom in a station or on a train. Best part is that you
| CAN rely on the trains. Nothing like Amtrak where if it's
| on time it's remarkable.
| chgs wrote:
| Have you travelled in Germany in the last couple of
| years?
| pontifk8r wrote:
| Not in the last four. Switzerland & UK, two years ago.
| pjmlp wrote:
| As someone living in Germany since 2004, that looks more
| like a DB ad than the trains I mostly travel on.
| gambiting wrote:
| Have you ever taken any trains in Europe? I cannot think of
| any route in any country where I've lived in Europe where
| driving would be even remotely close to taking the train,
| and in some cases it's faster than flying. Newcastle to
| London is 2h40m by train, about 5 hours of driving. Flight
| is 40 minutes but you're nowhere near the city centre, so
| once you take into account going through security plus
| necessary transfer times it's much longer. Brussels to
| Paris is an hour and a half on the train, driving is at
| least double that. Krakow to Warsaw is just over 2 hours,
| the drive is at least 3 hours and that's to the outskirts
| not city centre to city centre.
| pjmlp wrote:
| Portugal, unless you happen to be a lucky one travelling
| on the Lisbon - Porto connection line, good luck
| travelling faster than taking a car, or eventually a long
| distance bus.
|
| Spain, outside of the lines connecting Vigo, Barcelona,
| Madrid, Malaga, axis.
|
| Greece, anything outside Athens - Thessaloniki.
| qwezxcrty wrote:
| Geneve to Munich is probably an example I experienced
| several times.
| lagadu wrote:
| Taking a fast train is _significantly_ faster than driving.
| On short and medium trips they 're even competitive with
| flying, if you factor the time it takes to get to/from the
| airport and associated lead time associated with airports
| vs showing within 5-10 minutes of departure right at the
| city centre.
| mr_toad wrote:
| Don't forget to factor in all the additional time getting
| to the airport and dealing with check in and security.
| frankvdwaal wrote:
| ...and because they want you to be on time, you end up
| waiting for another half hour at the gates to sit in a
| cramped seat near a narrow aisle.
|
| I went by train to Germany during the autumn of last year
| and oh man, what a pleasure it was. I got there about 5
| minutes before the train, got in, dumped my suitcase and
| had room to spare.
|
| During the trip I sauntered between carriages, bought
| some (mediocre) food to scoff down in the restaurant
| carriage, which I opted to do at my seat rather than
| right there because I felt like some quiet time rather
| than the buzz.
|
| Later I traveled by plane to Spain in the spring and as
| nice as Barcelona was, I couldn't say the same about the
| plane trip, which was a necessity rather than a pleasure.
| pembrook wrote:
| This is a false conspiracy narrative that belongs on Reddit
| in the r/fuckcars filter bubble.
|
| Sure, the automotive industry stood to benefit from the
| decline of rail travel in the US. But they didn't really need
| to do anything for that to happen on its own. Reality is far
| less interesting than that. Turns out when you have tons of
| fertile land, even pre-industrialization your population
| tends to spread out a bit (the vast majority of Americans
| used to be farmers). Today the US has 3-5X less population
| density than any country with high speed rail. Autos saw
| massive success in the US due to this fact, and their
| prevalence reduced the demand for rail travel as a side
| effect, it wasn't some top down evil conspiracy.
|
| It's fun to blame everything on evil big business or evil big
| government, but it's also important to look at the first
| principles and base properties of the issue at hand first.
| rebolek wrote:
| While you're right about average density, there are some
| spots with much higher density population that could
| certainly benefit from high speed train.
| sdenton4 wrote:
| Here's the source. There were actual-court cases which
| found that oil and car manufacturers conspired to
| monopolize and convert local public transit to buses from
| rail.
|
| https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/General_Motors_streetcar_cons
| p...
|
| "Between 1938 and 1950, National City Lines and its
| subsidiaries, American City Lines and Pacific City Lines--
| with investment from GM, Firestone Tire, Standard Oil of
| California (through a subsidiary), Federal Engineering,
| Phillips Petroleum, and Mack Trucks--gained control of
| additional transit systems in about 25 cities.[a] Systems
| included St. Louis, Baltimore, Los Angeles, and Oakland.
| NCL often converted streetcars to bus operations in that
| period, although electric traction was preserved or
| expanded in some locations. Other systems, such as San
| Diego's, were converted by outgrowths of the City Lines.
| Most of the companies involved were convicted in 1949 of
| conspiracy to monopolize interstate commerce in the sale of
| buses, fuel, and supplies to NCL subsidiaries, but were
| acquitted of conspiring to monopolize the transit
| industry."
|
| This history also plays a large role in "Who Framed Roger
| Rabbit," as a bit of fun bonus lore...
| voidfunc wrote:
| Street cars != Intercity Rail
|
| Also I'd argue street cars are way worse than busses
| which have route flexibility.
|
| The bigger problem is Americans don't like being around
| other Americans and really don't like public transit.
|
| It's not some giant conspiracy.
| lukan wrote:
| "and really don't like public transit."
|
| I don't like bad public transit either.
|
| "Americans don't like being around other Americans "
|
| There could be the option of having personal cabins for
| yourself.
| lmm wrote:
| > Street cars != Intercity Rail
|
| No, but the two feed into each other. Intercity rail
| loses most of its advantages if you have to hire a car at
| the destination.
|
| > Also I'd argue street cars are way worse than busses
| which have route flexibility.
|
| They're better for that very reason. You can move
| somewhere with a decent commute and know that the
| streetcar isn't going to disappear at the stroke of a
| pen.
| FredPret wrote:
| Local public transit in the US is a very different beast
| to getting across the country.
|
| Manhattan may have high population density, and the
| public transit that goes with it; but building passenger
| rail thousands of miles to the other side of a sparsely
| populated continent just doesn't add up in the same way.
| drtgh wrote:
| https://jalopnik.com/did-musk-propose-hyperloop-to-stop-
| cali... At the time, it seemed that Musk
| had dished out the Hyperloop proposal just to make the
| public and legislators rethink the high-speed train.
| He didn't actually intend to build the thing. It was more
| that he wanted to show people that more creative ideas were
| out there for things that might actually solve problems and
| push the state forward. With any luck, the high-speed rail
| would be canceled. Musk said as much to me [Ashlee Vance]
| during a series of e-mails and phone calls leading up to
| the announcement.
| pembrook wrote:
| Ahh the smoking gun...another conspiracy theory?
|
| Trying to convince internet leftists that a cabal of Evil
| Capitalists are not behind all of the worlds ills is like
| trying to convince internet right wingers that most
| vaccines work.
| drtgh wrote:
| Left, right, does such a dichotomy even matter?
|
| An influential person admitted that he had interfered the
| development of the high-speed railway at US with a
| vaporware project, which reported to him juicy economic
| revenues generated by investments and subsidies from all
| over the world. Just with vaporware.
|
| Should people think that this kind of interference does
| not happen with influential pockets because you call it a
| conspiracy, while they call it just business?
| BlarfMcFlarf wrote:
| I don't really care what is in Elons heart. The lesson
| learned is the same regardless: ignore the nonsense
| gadgetbahns dreamed up by business people and focus on
| the real proven technologies in use already around to
| world.
| wishinghand wrote:
| I'd take this comment more seriously if there weren't car
| companies that bought up rail networks and shut them down.
| Panzer04 wrote:
| For what it's worth, I somewhat agree. High speed rail in
| particular is super expensive, and airplanes are
| surprisingly cheap and flexible in comparison.
| epolanski wrote:
| I kinda agree, except on the car part, because cars
| dominate even densely populated areas where trams, metros
| and buses should.
| geraldwhen wrote:
| You haven't lived until you've been assaulted by a
| homeless person on a bus in the US!
|
| Buses are a joke. We cannot have public transit here
| without security to match, like at airports.
| epolanski wrote:
| US has a huge social problem that spills into a security
| one.
|
| Quite unsurprisingly Americans end up isolating from each
| other in suburbs, often gated neighborhoods with private
| schools, cars and live overall miserable and unhappy
| lives.
| PaulDavisThe1st wrote:
| > Today the US has 3-5X less population density than any
| country with high speed rail.
|
| This may be true when averaged across the entire country
| (or even just the lower 48).
|
| But it is absolutely not true if you consider various zones
| of the country as candidates for good rail service.
|
| Several such zones exist, among them:
|
| 1. the north east corridor, perhaps one of the largest and
| densest conurbations in the world
|
| 2. the roughly rectangular shape formed with the NW corner
| in Minneapolis, the NW corner in Milwaukee, the SE corner
| in Detroit and SW corner in <wherever the hell that is>
|
| 3. The triangle in Texas formed by Dallas/Ft. Worth, Austin
| and San Antonio
|
| All 3 have higher population densities than those found in
| non-urban parts of Europe; the latter have good to
| excellent train service, but none of these 3 do.
| pembrook wrote:
| The problem is the equivalent driving times aren't crazy
| on those routes either though.
|
| When you factor in that you need a car in both your
| departing city and destination city (except for NYC), AND
| the fact that nearly every household in those regions
| owns one or multiple cars (which is not true in higher
| density/higher urbanization countries)...it begins to not
| make sense especially given the massive upfront cost of
| construction.
| mnky9800n wrote:
| You highlighted it. The real problem is when you get
| somewhere you still need a car.
| mitthrowaway2 wrote:
| It's possible that would gradually start to change,
| starting around rail stations.
| ghaff wrote:
| I do take Acela from Central Massachusetts to NYC but
| mostly because I hate driving into NYC so much. (And
| don't need a car when I get there.) It basically involves
| driving an hour in the wrong direction to south suburban
| Boston. I could drive to New Haven and for a longer drive
| I'd get a shorter/cheaper trip.
| bongodongobob wrote:
| I will speak to the Chicago, Milwaukee, Madison,
| Minneapolis/St Paul region.
|
| Rail is not going to happen until you don't need a car in
| those cities. Chicago you could do, but the others are
| not pedestrian friendly. Anyone traveling within that
| region will have a 95% chance of already owning a car.
| Unless the train gets you from Chicago to Minneapolis in
| an hour, people are just going to drive. The risk with
| car rental and money spent on Uber's isn't worth it.
|
| I feel like these types of comments come from people that
| live in NYC or LA. The rest of the country is so fuckin
| sparse. Your "walkable cities" idea doesn't make any
| sense and is completely unfeasible outside of major metro
| areas which land wise in the US is like 99%.
| PaulDavisThe1st wrote:
| For the record, I live in a tiny village in New Mexico.
|
| Also for the record, the overwhelming majority of the US
| population lives in metropolitan areas, not rural ones.
| rtpg wrote:
| I don't see why Madison doesn't work. I've taken buses to
| Madison, you can get downtown. You can usually find some
| transport. Or you can just call a ride share or
| something!
|
| I've done Chicago -> Madison by bus, and honestly prefer
| it to the plane at least (even from the airport). More
| comfortable seats and I get out just at a station. High
| frequency bus lines feel like good indicators of where
| some trains could work, and it's not like bus services
| are dead.
|
| (Similarly, I did Portland -> Eugene on Amtrak and it was
| nice and chill! I roadshared to my final destination but
| I had to get from A to B somehow)
| rtpg wrote:
| I do agree with the idea of building out strong localised
| networks (and roll my eyes at the "US rail network" dream
| maps people post out). But my impression from France and
| Germany at least is that you have two sort of failure
| modes:
|
| - For France, rural areas don't really have that good of
| a rail network. Instead there are several trunk lines
| that are reliable. But it means that east-west stuff is
| nearly non-existent. Lots of "drive me to the station and
| drop me off please". Good enough to put France at number
| 2 in numbers of km ridden per passenger!
|
| - For Germany, the network is much more evenly spread
| out. But ever German I've met complaints constantly about
| the unreliability of the trains, combined with the low
| rate of service. So you end up with stations everywhere,
| but if a train gets cancelled you could be stranded for
| hours.
|
| Anyways I do think the French model makes a hell of a lot
| of sense (prioritizing train frequency over coverage),
| but it might not be what people are expecting if they
| just look at a map of trains.
| pjmlp wrote:
| Also in rural Germany you will need a car anyway, even if
| all major cities are well connected.
| def_true_false wrote:
| German trains are unrealiable because they spend like
| 5-10 times less per km of railway than Austria or
| Switzerland.
| nec4b wrote:
| This probably has a lot to do with topography of Germany
| compared to both Austria and Switzerland.
| aziaziazi wrote:
| I don't understand the density argument: HST aren't
| supposed to connect every places, that's totally
| ineffective.
|
| Instead you build rails between major hubs (those that got
| the biggest airports usually) and add stops on some medium
| cities that happen to be on the way. It serves those living
| close enough of the connected cities that want to go close
| enough to another connected city. _close enough_ depends on
| the local connection options like regional trains, bus,
| bikes, trams... and if there's nothing you just grab a cab
| or rental car. The city of departure can be reached with
| your own personal car which is usually a bit cheaper and
| faster (therefore more range). Most travels destination are
| big cities or close enough (business, tourism...).
|
| Rail planing is a Pareto game.
| pembrook wrote:
| If you ran high speed rail between the two most populated
| cities in the US (NYC and LA), it'd be a 14 hour journey.
| And there's not that many conveniently placed major
| cities along the way where it even makes sense to add
| more than a few stops.
|
| I know we have a lot of rail enthusiasts here, but the
| average person tends not to like being stuck in a tube
| for 14 hours...even if that tube is substantially nicer
| and more roomy than an airplane.
|
| Let's not even talk about the cost of constructing that
| route.
| mnky9800n wrote:
| Everyone wants to think about how practical things are. A
| high speed sleeper train across America would be cool.
| People should do more cool shit.
| mitthrowaway2 wrote:
| I don't think anyone is proposing to start with a NY to
| LA HSR line. It's more like NY to DC, LA to SF, and maybe
| expand from there little by little.
| thfuran wrote:
| >the vast majority of Americans used to be farmers
|
| The vast majority of every agricultural society used to be
| farmers.
| PaulDavisThe1st wrote:
| > if we had a decedent high-speed rail system
|
| A decent high-speed rail system would be cool!
|
| But a decadent high speed rail system would be awesome!
| likeabatterycar wrote:
| > There used to be a similar service between Toronto and
| Montreal (both directions), where the train would pause for
| several hours midway so passengers would arrive at around 7:30
| a.m. well-rested.
|
| That trip is 1h 15m by air with 30 flights a day each way. That
| train doesn't exist anymore because it's impractical and
| people's time is valuable. We stopped taking Conestoga wagons
| from New York to California for the same reason.
| sebtron wrote:
| That was an example of a train going slower on purpose to let
| people sleep a full night. A regular high-spees train could
| do that trip in 2-3 hours, beating a 1:15 flight in
| convenience by a huge margin.
| throw5959 wrote:
| Since we're citing European trains, let's also cite
| European airports - I can arrive to the airport for an EU
| flight 20 minutes before take off and still have plenty of
| time to get everything sorted out. And I'm out of the
| airport within 15 minutes after landing - usually stepping
| right into a subway or something. I don't think it's such a
| huge margin if you fix your airports, which is going to be
| many orders of magnitude cheaper than building high speed
| rail from everywhere to everywhere.
| bpye wrote:
| > I can arrive to the airport for an EU flight 20 minutes
| before take off and still have plenty of time to get
| everything sorted out.
|
| Maybe you can but none will recommend that you do, for
| example Paris recommends at least 2 hours [0]. And if you
| need to check luggage you have no chance if you're only
| 20 minutes early, on a train you just carry it onto the
| carriage.
|
| [0] - https://www.parisaeroport.fr/en/passengers/flight-
| preparatio...
| thecopy wrote:
| While i agree that EU airports are very efficient, 20
| minutes before schedule take-off must be impossible.
| Surely you mean 20 minutes before boarding starts?
| throw5959 wrote:
| No, I'm usually the last person to board. Departure (but
| not arrival) frequently gets pushed back by 10-20
| minutes, though I am making it on time even if not. I
| have literally never waited at a security check and it
| takes a minute or two to get through - speaking about EU
| flights.
| saagarjha wrote:
| There's no way you are not missing flights if you think
| you can get through security and to your gate regularly
| in 20 minutes.
| throw5959 wrote:
| Roughly every fifth flight they call my name, but I never
| missed a flight because of late arrival.
| GuB-42 wrote:
| I took one of these trains. The service was short-lived
| though.
|
| It was called iDNight, by iDTGV, a former low cost high
| speed train operator in France. The idea was to run high
| speed trains at a slow speed during the night, turning a 3
| hour trip into an 8 hour trip so that you can get a full
| night, and also so it can leave as the departure station is
| closing and arrive as the destination station is opening,
| therefore exploiting downtime, I guess.
|
| These were not sleeper cars but regular high-speed train
| cars, not ideal for sleeping, but since most seats were
| vacant, at least in my experience, you could easily get two
| seats for yourself.
| riedel wrote:
| There is also flights in Europe that are faster. I recently
| traveled from Stuttgart to Vienna via night train. It was
| even more expensive. But this is not the point. Time sleeping
| in a night train is not lost. Also typically getting to the
| airport and from the airport into the city takes time. Same
| for airport security. And if there is enough wind that night
| one might even travel CO2 emission free.
| tpm wrote:
| Stuttgart to Vienna should take much less than the current
| 6+ hours, but the train network is heavily underinvested
| compared to alternatives.
| redmajor12 wrote:
| Why should the individual end user be concerned about CO2
| emissions? Or are we letting corporations in China
| outsource that guilt back to us?
| saagarjha wrote:
| Yes, because the corporations in China are emitting those
| making things you use.
| Beijinger wrote:
| "I'd arrive in a new city each morning feeling refreshed
| because of the train's sleeping accommodations."
|
| Aeh, where were you travelling? Many countries did not have
| sleeper trains. Don't get me wrong. I did the same, travelling
| at night in trains, and it saved me a night in a hotel. But I
| did not arrive well rested, I arrived train wrecked.
| airstrike wrote:
| 20 years ago?
| Beijinger wrote:
| Yes. It was called Interrail. You had to have an EU
| Passport to buy this ticket. And be below 26 years of age.
| I think it still exits.
| ben_w wrote:
| It's still around, I used it in 2016 aged 32.
|
| I've not heard of any age requirements.
|
| https://www.interrail.eu/en
| bpye wrote:
| There is a cheaper ticket for 12-27.
| GuB-42 wrote:
| It still exists: https://www.interrail.eu/
|
| You don't have to be younger than 26 to buy one, not
| anymore, but it is cheaper if you are. If you are a EU
| citizen, it gets you free, unlimited travel by train in
| most European countries. If you are not a EU citizen,
| there is the Eurail pass that is similar.
|
| But that's the theory. In practice there are important
| limitations:
|
| - You can't use it in your home country, except for a
| single round trip: in and out.
|
| - If you make a reservation, you will have to pay
| reservation fees, and many long-distance and high-speed
| trains only have reserved seats.
|
| - Not all seats are available to pass owners, if you want
| to travel in these seats, you will have to pay full
| price.
|
| And considering that the pass itself is not that cheap,
| you really have some planning to do to see if it is worth
| it. In many cases, it isn't.
| sazor wrote:
| Not citizen but resident of EU country.
|
| Last summer Spain's Renfe offered huge discount for a
| pass for people under 31. Only for paper version though
| which is slightly less convenient but worth it anyway. I
| guess other eu countries could have similar seasonal
| discounts.
| bpye wrote:
| And to nit pick, it's not just the EU, for example the UK
| is still included post Brexit.
| sakjur wrote:
| For non-Europeans: https://www.eurail.com/en
|
| There are some home country limitations for Interrail,
| but I'm not really sure why the passes are still kept
| separate beyond that. It seems Eurail and Interrail are
| mostly identical beyond the residency/anti-residency
| requirements.
| freetanga wrote:
| Or no planning at all, as I did 26 years ago. Meet some
| people in a cafe in Paris, agree to all go to Amsterdam
| for 2 days, grab your bag and then find a hostel when you
| arrive. I spent 2 months without knowing where I was
| going to wake up the following day.
|
| No mobiles, only lifeline home being a pay phone call
| every week.
|
| Not the same stores in every city as it is today.
|
| Life was beautiful back then and we did not know it.
| GuB-42 wrote:
| I understand what you are talking about, and you can
| still do that, but it is going to be expensive. Or at
| least, expensive for a typical 20-something heading out
| to explore the world.
|
| Times have changed, and now like it or not, we are in the
| internet and smartphone age. The best travel deals are
| online, the cheapest accommodations are also found
| online. The Interrail pass is a bit of a relic, it can
| still be useful, but if you have no plan and limited
| cash, you are probably better off chasing last minute
| deals on your trusty smartphone.
|
| And yes, I think we have lost something, disconnecting is
| hard, and stores tend to be all the same these days, and
| finding something interesting to bring back home is
| becoming a difficult task now that you can order
| everything online.
|
| But I also think we gained something. The language
| barrier is breaking down. More and more people speak
| decent English as a secondary language, smartphones come
| with pretty decent translators, plane tickets are
| ridiculously cheap if you are not too picky. Getting in
| touch or keeping contact with people on the other side of
| the planet is almost too easy, great for exchange. When
| travelling in a group (even a temporary group), having
| mobile phones cuts down on the time waiting for people to
| gather, and offers more freedom than "let's meet at a
| precise place at a precise time", which is one of the
| most annoying parts of travelling in a group.
|
| Now, I talked a lot about "cheap". That's because while
| travelling, I consider using money to be like cheating.
| You can do everything (well, almost) with money. Want to
| do a smartphone-less trip, randomly hopping into trains?
| You can, with money. Finding a ho(s)tel without price-
| checking online first? Sure, with money. Cheapening out
| is a good way to keep a "no plan" travel unplanned. But
| yeah, now there are smartphones involved.
|
| And life is still beautiful. In my opinion, more
| beautiful than it has ever been, but in different ways.
| ericmay wrote:
| > But I also think we gained something. The language
| barrier is breaking down. More and more people speak
| decent English as a secondary language, smartphones come
| with pretty decent translators
|
| Is that really something that was gained? As we lose more
| and more languages we start to lose unique cultural
| features right? It's like "we gained McDonald's in every
| city - my comforting home food is available everywhere".
|
| > When travelling in a group (even a temporary group),
| having mobile phones cuts down on the time waiting for
| people to gather
|
| Kind of the same thing. It's a focus on efficiency. Speed
| run through life experiences. Why even go to the Louvre
| when you can throw on your Meta headset and do it from
| your couch?
|
| I'm not a travel elitist or anything like that, I just
| think these "benefits" come with a lot of drawbacks too.
| As the world gets smaller and more efficient it becomes
| homogenized and travel starts to become pointless.
| ghaff wrote:
| I sort of agree with both you and the parent.
|
| Connectivity/smartphones do make things "easier" but they
| also tend to make them less spontaneous and
| serendipitous. And, yes, while a lot of it is that I'm
| trying to declutter my house and I like to travel light,
| I also find that I have pretty much zero interest in
| shopping abroad.
| tugu77 wrote:
| > But I also think we gained something. [...] plane
| tickets are ridiculously cheap if you are not too picky.
|
| Not really a gain if you ask me.. The melting glaciers
| are agreeing with me and they are not impressed by the
| downvotes I'll receive for this opinion.
| blackmoon42 wrote:
| And if you have your 18th birthday, you might apply to
| discover EU. An EU lottery to give interrail passes to
| young adults for free.
| sourcepluck wrote:
| The word "free" is being ruthlessly abused here,
| surely...
|
| If I follow the link there, it costs 239E for a 5-day
| pass, where each of the 5 days must be used in a 1 month
| period. That's not "gratis", that's 47.8E per day the
| train is used?
| brabel wrote:
| I travelled Europe on night trains almost exactly 20
| years ago as well, and I was not an EU citizen back
| then... I guess I just paid more than with interrail?
| Just wanted to mention it was possible, and must've been
| pretty cheap as I was broke as hell at the time.
| caseyy wrote:
| I thought the same as I was reading the comment you're
| responding to. Arriving rested after public transport? Get a
| load of that guy :) Not sure how anyone does that, but of
| course it would be nice to learn this dark magic.
| donalhunt wrote:
| First class sleeper cabins would count. Definitely not
| equivalent to a hotel room but better than a couchette.
|
| The definitely ran between Germany and the Netherlands in
| the 00s because I took at least one trip that way.
| Tijdreiziger wrote:
| IIUC you have these options:
|
| * couchette (6 couchettes per cabin, less comfort)
|
| * 2nd class bed (3 beds per cabin)
|
| * 1st class bed (same as 2nd class, but 2 beds per cabin)
|
| * 1st class private bed (same as above, but without
| roommate)
| bialpio wrote:
| "sleeper train" is the key here. Another keyword to search
| for is "couchette", I think that's how it's called in some
| places. See e.g.
| https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Couchette_car and the map.
| Beijinger wrote:
| Sleeper train can be a great experience. Unfortunately,
| this was not an option when I was young either due to
| pricing or due to availability. At least in Europe with
| the InterRail ticket.
| VBprogrammer wrote:
| I've used the Caledonian Sleeper a couple of times. The
| first time it worked reasonably well, I got a reasonable
| amount of sleep. The second time not so much, not really
| any fault of the train, I just didn't relax enough to get
| a reasonable amount of sleep.
|
| Both times I'd say well rested would be a stretch. The
| first time felt a bit like a magic carpet in that I got
| somewhere while using up no useful hours but it still
| wasn't perfect.
| chgs wrote:
| The lowland sleeper London-Glasgow/Edinburgh isn't long
| enough for a good nights sleep in my view.
| VBprogrammer wrote:
| Yeah, you can stay on it for a bit longer after they
| arrive but you'd have to be very asleep not to notice the
| lack of movement and noise of the station around you.
| Funny enough the best night I had on it, it was delayed
| by a few hours (normally a horrible thing on the train
| but perfect on a slightly too short sleeper!).
| caseyy wrote:
| That's exactly what I mean. I never sleep much better
| than I would sleeping in a car.
|
| I suppose it's the novelty of sleeping in a moving
| vehicle, my flight attendant friend said it took them a
| while to start sleeping well on long haul flights.
|
| Perhaps with a lot of benzodiazepines or drowsy anti-
| histamines I could attempt to sleep well in a sleeper
| train, but not normally. Happy for those who can of
| course.
| bialpio wrote:
| Gotcha. It's the same for me on an airplane (I think
| maybe because I'm unable to fall asleep on my back), but
| I didn't have problems on the sleeper train.
|
| Do you think it's the noise for you, the movement, or
| something else (like lack of privacy)? I started taking
| earplugs with me for any kind of trip now, they are a
| godsend.
| Tijdreiziger wrote:
| Couchettes are cheaper, lower-comfort bunks.
|
| Most sleepers also offer cabins with proper beds (for a
| premium).
| lagadu wrote:
| These are trains with sleeping cabins and actual beds you
| sleep in. It's better than many hostels.
| metabagel wrote:
| I rode in a sleeper car in December 1999 in Australia,
| between Melbourne and Sydney, and it was an unpleasant
| experience. It was a jerky, bumpy, noisy ride, somebody
| kept going between the cars for smoke breaks and the
| smell wafted into our cabin, and there was a baby crying
| in the cabin next door.
| prmoustache wrote:
| I think this is a personal thing. Even at home we are not
| equal. I can sleep almost anywhere, and usually fall
| asleep in a very short time after lying down and closing
| my eyes. Some people can even fall asleep on a chair in a
| wedding party with loud mudic and bright lights without
| even being wasted. Some people can't. Some will always
| complain about the bed, even in the most luxury/premium
| hotel. My partner can't stand the slightest light going
| through blinds, a neighbor making noise or the drunktards
| making noise in the street at night. Yet she will fall
| asleep in a matter of minutes in a car.
|
| So as an individual traveling alone, you know your limits
| and can pretty much figure out if that way of travelling
| works for you. For a family, you are pretty sure at least
| one member of the family will have a rough night and
| complain in the morning.
|
| A sure way to spend good night while travelling is to be
| very active during the day. You sleep much better if you
| have walked for 15 to 20km around a city to visit it than
| if you have been idle most of the time and taken taxis
| and buses whenever you could. Most lazy people don't
| understand that rest has to be earned.
| ghaff wrote:
| I often have trouble first night on a trip even when jet
| lag isn't involved although that, of course, makes things
| worse. Then I usually get into a rhythm.
|
| And, yes, especially when time zones are involved,
| sticking to a schedule and getting exercise helps.
| antihero wrote:
| I think the key is to not get wasted on the train.
| Muromec wrote:
| Sleeper trains and being young help a lot. I always chose
| 10h sleeper over 5 hour bus or car when I had to do the
| trip between Odesa and Kyiv in my 20ies.
| madaxe_again wrote:
| Being _short_ is probably the biggest decider - I went
| around the indochinese peninsula on sleepers a few years
| ago, and my wife, pretty much on par with the average
| height for the region, slept like a tot, found her bunk
| spacious, while I, several SDs above the average,
| awkwardly wedged myself into my coffin and encountered
| every jolt through my bones - and believe me there were a
| lot of jolts. They stop everywhere, and there's plenty of
| shunting.
|
| But then again some sleepers (Shiki-Shima in Japan) are
| like being in a luxury hotel. Rather enjoyed having a
| soak in the tub in my suite.
| chgs wrote:
| I took a train from New York to Miami a few months ago,
| very restful, very civilised, and that was in a roomette,
| not even a full sleeper.
| TomK32 wrote:
| There's a map to prove you wrong. I counted 26 from the UK to
| Turkey and from that bit of Spain to Ukraine (a different
| gauge doesn't mean you can have nighttrains). The solid lines
| have sleeper wagons. Which are useless anyways if you are
| taller than 190cm. https://back-on-track.eu/night-train-map/
|
| Actually Spain seems to have more to offer according to this
| map http://www.night-trains.com/europe/
|
| edit: Nope, Spain is pretty almost void of night trains
| https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Trenhotel
| freetanga wrote:
| 20 years ago was quite a different story. Before low cost
| airlines, mobiles, and almost before the euro...
|
| I did a similar trip in the late 90s. Not 20 stays in
| train, but well above 10. Paris-Madrid, Rome-Paris,
| Bordeaux-Paris, to name a few.
| bpye wrote:
| I spent a couple weeks travelling by train across Europe a
| few years ago on an Interrail pass. I found sleeper cabins
| were generally pretty comfortable, though you do have to pay
| extra for them.
|
| If you were just sleeping in a seat then yes I can believe
| you felt awful the next day.
| throwup238 wrote:
| That sounds like my experience on Russian trains (traveling
| between Moscow and Vilnius) except the men were drunk. As a
| ten year old kid traveling with his mom, it was
| threatening!
| dspillett wrote:
| I travel by train regularly in the UK and it isn't unusual
| to take up to 8 hours to get anywhere :)
|
| The closest I've been to a sleeper in recent decades has
| been five hours on a cold station because cancellations &
| delays have meant missing the last onward connection of the
| day so waiting for the first morning service (there are
| supposed to be provisions for that by way of providing
| accommodation or replacement taxi service, which do
| sometimes work, but at that time of night there isn't
| always someone available & reachable to enact such
| policies).
| Moru wrote:
| 8 hours won't even get me out of Sweden from where I
| live.
| bpye wrote:
| I've had my fair share of poor UK rail experiences,
| especially during holiday periods. Standing on the train
| from London Paddington most of the way towards Exeter is
| never fun.
|
| In the case you couldn't reach someone, doesn't every
| platform have a phone as well?
| s1artibartfast wrote:
| I traveled by sleeper train in india, around 2010. They had
| beds, but every time I woke up, there were 3-4 Indian dudes
| that had come into our cabin and climbed on my bed to get
| some shut eye.
|
| It wasn't threatening or anything, just a wild experience and
| insightful lesson in cultural differences
| bowmessage wrote:
| Strange men climbing into one's bed sounds very threatening
| to me..?
| s1artibartfast wrote:
| Yeah, that's the trippy part right. really highlights
| cultural assumptions.
| caminante wrote:
| It's less invasive, but still crazier than it sounds.
|
| Indian railways changed the base sleeper cars into free-
| for-alls by changing sleeper cabin classifications and
| stopping verifying tickets. Now you have people buying
| the cheapest tickets (unreserved general) and swarming
| the "reserved" sleeper cabin berths. [0] They're just
| over-cramming the trains.
|
| [0] https://www.tripsavvy.com/indian-railways-trains-
| travel-clas...
| throw__away7391 wrote:
| > I'd arrive in a new city each morning feeling refreshed
| because of the train's sleeping accommodations.
|
| Oh man this has definitely not been my experience! Last I tried
| this I booked a "VIP" sleeper car with a private
| bathroom/shower, and it was anything but. The constant shaking
| of the train side to side coupled with a bunch of young
| American girls running up and down the halls screaming to each
| other all night meant I didn't get any sleep at all. To make
| things worse, the same girls making noise all night used up all
| the water, leaving me covered in soap with no way to rinse it
| off, and still 8+ hours until my hotel check-in. I can usually
| sleep anywhere regardless of noise or light or mattress
| quality, but sleeping a train is a new category of difficulty.
| kortilla wrote:
| Sleeper cars in the US cost more than a hotel for a night.
| Saving the cost of a hotel is not really a selling point
| gcanyon wrote:
| This is the part that really frustrates me. Not that I've
| researched, but it seems like trains should have basically
| unlimited space for passengers, at very little increase in
| cost -- a five-mile-long train takes maybe 1-2 more people to
| operate than a 1-mile train? So why doesn't the U.S. lean
| into the sleeper concept? If we could increase speeds to
| 90mph and have affordable sleeper cars, trips of up to 1,000
| miles would be conveniently achievable -- that's Chicago to
| Dallas, Los Angeles to Denver, or Miami to Washington, D.C.
| lukan wrote:
| "a five-mile-long train takes maybe 1-2 more people to
| operate than a 1-mile train"
|
| Likely a bit more. Also there is maintainance, the extra
| weight, the extra cost of buying more waggons .. but still
| I agree, thay this should be the direction.
|
| Still, a 5 mile train will have problems at most train
| station ..
| thfuran wrote:
| And at road crossings and passing loops and so on. Really
| long trains are a fairly significant logistical
| challenge.
| lukan wrote:
| Yeah, I would rather go with smaller, but automated
| trains. But in germany for example this would mean,
| basically changing everything installed electronically
| there already is.
| afiori wrote:
| The problem with trains in Germany is not high tech
| automation it is the aggressive cost-cutting that removed
| a lot of redundancy and stability, so now it is a worse
| service in quality and reliability
| kccqzy wrote:
| Do you not expect attendants on these trains? And since
| your train only travels at 90mph you will need a larger
| number of dining cars and their associated cooks and
| waiters/waitresses.
| inglor_cz wrote:
| I like trains, but I was never refreshed and well-rested after
| a night journey in a sleeper car. It just twists and jumps too
| much (extra points for curvy tracks where you end up with your
| head slightly downwards from your body half of the time), plus
| many railway stations on the way have _way_ too loud
| announcements, plus the border police likes to check even when
| it theoretically shouldn 't (Schengen). I just can't manage to
| get deep uninterrupted sleep in such conditions.
| magicalhippo wrote:
| Nowhere[1], if you're in Norway.
|
| I jest a little, but it's so bad here we've started to call it
| "bus replacement service" when the train is not cancelled, rather
| than "rail replacement service" when the train is cancelled.
|
| [1]: https://www.nrk.no/norge/full-togstans-i-hele-norge-
| grunnet-...
| spinningarrow wrote:
| Is that a recent thing? I've taken trains several times of the
| last few years and always had an overwhelmingly positive
| experience.
| magicalhippo wrote:
| It's gotten quite a lot worse in the past few years. In 2023
| one quarter of all trains were delayed or cancelled.
|
| The gov't hasn't allocated enough for maintenance for several
| decades, and we're paying the price now.
|
| The National Audit Office recently released[1] a scalding
| report about it.
|
| [1]: https://www.riksrevisjonen.no/rapporter-
| mappe/no-2023-2024/s...
| awiesenhofer wrote:
| > The gov't hasn't allocated enough for maintenance for
| several decades, and we're paying the price now.
|
| Ah yes, the german approach.
| bpye wrote:
| It does amuse me somewhat that every country believes
| they have the worst train network, the UK is no
| different.
| sixothree wrote:
| These things always make me jealous of the travel privilege
| people have compared to where I live. By car there is nothing
| interesting within 6 hours of my house.
| jbverschoor wrote:
| Waiting for the snarky comments about the Dutch NS so I don't
| have to make them :)
| switch007 wrote:
| I think every Dutchie who moans about their trains needs to
| spend a month in the UK LOL. I'm jealous of Dutch trains!
|
| 4 hour journey in peak time from Maastricht to Gronigen for 30
| EUR without advance purchase? Incredible.
|
| 40% discount in off-peak times and weekends for 67 EUR/year?
| Bargain. We have a 33% discount option which is available to
| everyone but it is only for trains in the south of England
| (there lots of others for young people, elderly people,
| disabled people etc)
|
| Very, very simple fare system in comparison to ours.
|
| Great connections from Schipol.
|
| I know it's not perfect - there are strikes, very busy trains
| etc.
| lostlogin wrote:
| Even the worst European system looks good compared to New
| Zealand. We just started a 32 day closure of all train lines in
| Auckland, the first of 96 planned for the year. They aren't far
| off needing press releases for when trains a running.
|
| https://www.rnz.co.nz/news/national/537619/auckland-rail-shu...
| edwinjm wrote:
| You can complain about the Dutch NS, but in most countries,
| it's way worse.
|
| Some numbers people from other countries can only dream about:
|
| punctuality less than 5 minutes: 89.7% punctuality less than 15
| minutes: 97.0%
| derhuerst wrote:
| similar project: https://www.trainconnections.com/
| fforflo wrote:
| People living in central/western Europe: You have no idea how
| fortunate you are to be able to hop on a train and ride to
| another major city in a few hours. We mortals of the southeastern
| Europe feel detached from the rest of the world.
|
| Yeah, I know German trains occasionally are late, but I remember
| standing on the platform in Munich, envying those who could
| travel to Madrid or Brussels without going to the airport--
| security checks, yada.
| toephu2 wrote:
| America has entered the chat...
| pjmlp wrote:
| As Portuguese living in DACH space, yeah but the DB experience
| occasionally makes me feel right back at home.
| ChumpGPT wrote:
| It sounds romantic until they cancel your train or it is hours
| late, missed transfers, dirty cabins, etc. It's all a crap shoot
| on whether you get a nice train and everything goes smoothly.
| I've traveled by train in Germany, Poland, Czechia, Austria,
| Hungary, Ukraine, etc.
|
| Driving your vehicle is the best way to go if you want to enjoy
| the sights on the way.
| ekianjo wrote:
| 8hours without counting for delays and missed connections,
| something that the SNCF routinely experiences.
| pjmlp wrote:
| Once it took me a full day Paris - Geneva, which included
| travelling back to Paris when we were about midway, only to
| return to Geneva when about 100km close to Paris, stopping in
| the middle of nowhere to get the bar refilled, as everyone went
| there, and a voucher to use in another TGV travel within one
| year.
|
| The official reason, some powerline issue.
| bigblind wrote:
| Being visually impaired, I love the independence that the public
| transport network in Central Europe gives me. I live in the
| Netherlands, and frequently visit my parents in Belgium. I've
| also visited friends in Germany, all without relying on a sighted
| companion for transportation.
| ricardobayes wrote:
| What a shame we don't have yet a high-speed line between Lisbon
| and Madrid. Two "sibling" countries, intertwined Iberian history
| and heritage, yet to travel between the capitals it's a 17-hour
| journey passing through Lisbon, Porto, Vigo (Galicia) and then
| Madrid.
| russellbeattie wrote:
| It looks like they're constructing a high speed route from
| Madrid to Badajoz to be finished by 2030, with the goal of
| extending to Lisbon. [1]
|
| I lived in Madrid for a few years... It's hard to get anywhere
| from there by train outside of Spain, though it's definitely
| easier now than it used to be thanks to the high speed train to
| Barcelona.
|
| 1.
| https://en.m.wikipedia.org/wiki/Madrid%E2%80%93Extremadura_h...
| Rendello wrote:
| I saw that and thought it was a shame the line would take 15+
| years, then I remembered what year it's about to be.
| benhurmarcel wrote:
| It's a shame they removed the night train too. I took it a few
| years ago, it was convenient.
| switch007 wrote:
| Siblings who can't stand each other and turn their backs to
| each other
| Beijinger wrote:
| Without checking, Brussels is probably your best starting point.
| You should be able to reach: Frankfurt, London, Paris, Amsterdam
| and many more.
| Beijinger wrote:
| Obviously: https://www.seat61.com/
| yumraj wrote:
| Question: many of these could be day trips, if train schedule
| permits, if one is trying to cover many cities during a single
| trip.
|
| I know it's not an ideal way to visit Europe, but just humor me
| please.
|
| What's a good city to make the base, which has good connectivity
| with as many different cities in different countries as possible,
| and is a good destination in itself?
| ascorbic wrote:
| Paris is probably your best bet by those criteria.
| yumraj wrote:
| Thanks
| ascorbic wrote:
| I'd also recommend seat61.com, which is the best source of
| info on international train travel. This page is relevant
| to your interests: https://www.seat61.com/international-
| trains/trains-from-Pari...
| yumraj wrote:
| This is a fantastic resource. Appreciate it..
| ghaff wrote:
| I'd probably agree on Paris. Maybe Berlin. But Paris is
| probably a better choice for historical reasons.
| ulrischa wrote:
| In Germany: Nowhere because the Deutsche Bahn is late again:
| https://www.dw.com/en/germany-a-third-of-long-distance-train...
| https://www.theguardian.com/business/2023/oct/14/its-the-sam...
| starbugs wrote:
| Well, nowhere wouldn't be that bad actually. At least, you
| wouldn't be that far from home. In practice, you go somewhere.
| But you usually end up in some place in the middle of nowhere
| in between your departure point and your destination. Also,
| it's freezing and the next train (which of course doesn't
| arrive on time) will be overloaded - that is, if you're lucky.
| Most of the time, there won't even be a train but a
| "replacement bus service" which commonly is a single small bus
| that about 200 people try to board simultaneously after they
| waited for about an hour and a half.
|
| The whole torture is accompanied by awkward excuses like
| "unexpected staff shortage", "technical disruption", "signal
| repairs", or "delay due to earlier journey" which you can look
| at in an app that tends to not work while you wait and freeze.
|
| Bonus: If all else fails, you can play "Bahn Bingo" while you
| reflect on the experience of your trip:
| https://www.bahnbingo.de/
| LAC-Tech wrote:
| I clicked a city, and I have no idea how to "un click" it. I
| tried refreshing the page as well. It's stuck with the first city
| I clicked on.
| alexott wrote:
| For Germany it's far from reality... it shows from Paderborn to
| Dortmund in less than hour, but usually it's good if you get
| there in two hours by train...
| mlok wrote:
| For some reason the result page keeps reloading indefinitely, and
| it renders the site unusable on Brave/iOS :(
| TheRealPomax wrote:
| You might want to make that a little more biassed towards major
| train stations in regions with dense train networks. I wanted to
| see how far I could get from Amsterdam, but it kept localizing me
| to hyper-local stations like Duivendrecht or Zaandam, which isn't
| super useful =)
| hibikir wrote:
| The data needs refreshing: The time from my hometown in Spain to
| Madrid is almost 2 hours shorter than it claims, as a new line
| has opened.
|
| Ti might also be missing how new companies have recently caused
| speedups in other routes by skipping stations altogether: A stop
| on a high velocity train can be over 20 minutes if it has to go
| from full speed to zero and back again
| dinkblam wrote:
| why not create the same things for cars? would be great if you
| could see where you could go in 1/2/3 hours from your location.
| no current map or navigation service seems to be of help here
| mtmail wrote:
| It's computational more complex (thus expensive): more types of
| vehicles, more potential roads to travel, traffic or road
| limitations (maximum speed, width, allowed access). There's
| niche players like https://playground.traveltime.com/isochrones
| . Technical term is https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Isochrone_map
|
| [Edit] https://withinhours.com/ seems easy to use
| arkensaw wrote:
| depends on the country. if you're in Ireland, only Ireland or a
| tiny bit of the UK
| arkensaw wrote:
| I had a chance to travel by rail from Amsterdam to Belgium and I
| chose a first class ticket, hoping to experience some real luxury
| (I've never travelled first class anywhere before)
|
| It was very disappointing. We had to wait on an exposed end of
| the platform away from regular commuters. When I boarded it was
| no more luxurious than a regular train. I got a meal which
| consisted of a sandwich which was, I swear, a 1" x 4" sliver of
| bread with broccoli pesto on it, and another piece on top. not
| even a full sandwich. I also got a lukewarm cup of coffee and a
| yoghurt.
| bgnn wrote:
| 1st class for such a distance isn't for luxury but for more
| space. You should check before buying anything.
| JoshTriplett wrote:
| First class varies by train. Most often, though, it means fewer
| seats packed into the same space; for instance, often coach has
| a 2/2 configuration (2 seats on each side), while first class
| has a 2/1 configuration. First class also more often has seats
| facing each other with a table.
| tlubinski wrote:
| They just launched a new high-speed train from Berlin to Paris
| with a travel time of 8 hours:
| https://apnews.com/article/germany-france-berlin-paris-highs...
| tigershark wrote:
| Yeah, less than from Milan to my city still in Italy...
| aziaziazi wrote:
| For those that think it's impossible for the USA because of the
| density or geography or oil economy, please have a look at that
| map:
|
| https://en.m.wikipedia.org/wiki/Rail_transport_in_Russia
|
| edit: traveled with the transiberian as a tourist, it was full of
| workers, business man, students, whatever, hopping on and of in
| different places for connections or destinations. Best human
| experience ever in all three classes.
|
| Edit2: definitely not high speed. I think that's a better way of
| life.
| gcanyon wrote:
| I'm curious what you intend by your comparison to the Russian
| train system -- Russia has more distance to cover/is more
| spread out, but the U.S. has over twice as many miles of track.
| I'm pretty confident that that comparison doesn't hold if we
| compare passenger rail miles, but I think the point is that the
| track is there in the U.S., it's just that few people here find
| passenger rail compelling as an alternative to car/plane
| transportation.
| cenamus wrote:
| The US also has over 2x as many people and wayyyy more wealth
| aziaziazi wrote:
| I share most of your view. There's no physic problem in the
| US against more train usage. I'm not a politician but it
| seems there's so many more public incentives in favor of cars
| and planes that it's a more sensible choice for Americans to
| use them. Trains are not intrinsically worse in the US, they
| just aren't helped the same way roads, fuel and airports are.
| bugglebeetle wrote:
| American Exceptionalism is unfortunately a largely incurable
| mental illness.
| socksy wrote:
| To be fair, I think every country has something that they
| think they're somehow the exception for
| yeputons wrote:
| Moreover, I've never heard of a long-distance passenger train
| being delayed or cancelled in Russia. Granted, I mostly knew
| about major trains to major destinations from Moscow/Saint
| Petersburg. Not a single person I knew had a plan for "the
| train is cancelled/delayed". Like, forgetting ID is more
| likely. I've heard it's a USSR legacy where passenger trains
| had much higher priority than even freight trains. Flight
| cancellations or delays - sure, they do happen.
|
| Local trains even in these major cities do get delayed (around
| 2-5 minutes is typical, very rarely up to 30 minutes) or
| cancelled. Delays are in the moment, cancellations are
| typically announced a day or two in advance, as I was told.
|
| "11 trains are late for at least two hours" makes regional
| news.
| DiogenesKynikos wrote:
| East of the Mississippi, the population density of the US is
| not that much lower than that of the EU, anyways. Within some
| relatively large regions of the US, such as the Northeast
| Megalopolis, the population density is higher than most of
| Western Europe.
| pxmpxm wrote:
| Revealed preference. Usage of train travel (public transit in
| general) goes down with income, and people in the US have an
| order of magnitude more disposable income versus Russia.
|
| The take rate of air conditioning in subsaharan Africa is far
| lower compared to similar-climate places like Florida, but I
| wouldn't use that fact to posit that sans-AC is somehow better.
| bryananderson wrote:
| People with other options don't take the train in (most of)
| the USA because the trains in (most of) the USA are bad.
|
| Of course the US is far larger than any single EU country,
| but the cities aren't evenly distributed. There are many
| clusters of decently-close cities, and vast areas with very
| few large cities at all. Salt Lake or Denver may never have
| much useful intercity rail, but lots of regions _could_ have
| it if we chose to build it (and learn from those who build it
| well, unlike California HSR).
| kuon wrote:
| This is so bad when compared to Japan.
|
| I don't mean that to be mean, but there is so much improvement
| possible. I hope it will improve. I live in Switzerland and I
| cannot use public transport most if the time because there isn't
| any.
| afiodorov wrote:
| Vilnius Riga connection missing
| mihaaly wrote:
| Awful UX! : /
| Am4TIfIsER0ppos wrote:
| And run the risk of being set on fire. Seriously how long will it
| be before that happens over here? There's already been an
| incident of a person throwing a bucket of excrement over someone
| on the metro here. Not to mention the dude I saw wiping his wart
| covered feet all over the seat.
| Fnoord wrote:
| I went from Belgrade to Aachen about 15-20 years ago. It cost me
| more than my plane ticket from Dusseldorf to Belgrade (though I
| got robbed/scammed at Belgrade). From Belgrade to Croatia the old
| DB train went 60 km/hour. It did have power sockets. I was nearly
| alone. Then came the evening in Croatia, the train went quicker
| than 60 hm/hour, people boarded (youth with backpacks), and sleep
| got a bit more tough. Near Ljubljana and Wien there were very
| bright lights at the station, and more people boarded till the 6
| seater was overburdened with people trying to sleep yet take care
| of their belongings. The whole trip took near 24 hours. But if I
| was with a partner, it would have felt a whole lot more safe, so
| that is my recommendation: go with a friend and make sure you set
| checks & boundaries beforehand.
| svilen_dobrev wrote:
| hehe.. Varna-Sofia (Bulgaria, ~450km) is 7h.20m.. on good days,
| eh, nights.
| pahn wrote:
| I made an art installation on this question once:
| https://bildsignal.de/p_derweil
|
| "derweil is an interactive video installation correlating time,
| space and big data to provide tailor-made instructions on how to
| get lost. Materials: Google Directions and Streetview APIs,
| JavaScript, NW.js, cables.gl, Involt, Arduino IDE, computers,
| thermal paper, plastic, metals, wood."
|
| (I doubt I could still run this today, though. I used some kind
| of 'hack' to bypass Google Streetview API limitations and I'm
| pretty sure they fixed this ages ago... ;D)
| balderdash wrote:
| I'm surprised that specialized routes in the us haven't gotten
| more traction. I think the Heathrow express is brilliant example
| of this (depending on what terminal your flying from) it's almost
| always faster than driving, it gets you into central London, it's
| cheaper, and there are no connections/ transfers. It boggles my
| mind that their isn't an equivalent in the us (say a DIRECT rail
| link to terminals at EWR, JFK, LGA and manhattan.
|
| My experience with rail travel in the us, is (outside the NE
| corridor / Acela: 1) trains do not depart/arrive at convenient
| locations, 2) go too slowly[1], and often are not very price/time
| competitive [2].
|
| 1. I believe the Pennsylvania Railroad Congressional train
| averaged about the same speed as the Acela DC>NY in 1940's
| -1960's 2. DCA>LGA 12/31 is $202 ~2:40 door to door time, Acela
| is $255 and is ~3:15 door to door.
| nixass wrote:
| Dupe
|
| https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=32276017
| zahma wrote:
| Paris to Berlin is now about 8h. I thought it'd be shorter. I
| also think Paris to Milan is approximately the same time.
___________________________________________________________________
(page generated 2024-12-29 23:01 UTC)