Where can you go in Europe by train in 8h?(chronotrains.com)
chronotrains.com
Where can you go in Europe by train in 8h?
https://www.chronotrains.com/en
427 comments
"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.
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.
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
It wasn't threatening or anything, just a wild experience and insightful lesson in cultural differences
Strange men climbing into one’s bed sounds very threatening to me..?
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...
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...
Yeah, that's the trippy part right. really highlights cultural assumptions.
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.
If you were just sleeping in a seat then yes I can believe you felt awful the next day.
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!
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).
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).
8 hours won't even get me out of Sweden from where I live.
30 hours and I still haven't left the province of Ontario (Canada).
Canada not in Europe :-)
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?
In the case you couldn’t reach someone, doesn’t every platform have a phone as well?
Certainly not every station, at least not then. And the trick would be reaching someone who can authorise something useful.
In the sleeping cabins I can sleep fine, but they're usually really expensive. In the couchettes I can sleep about 50-60% of the time. In the seats, not at all.
So I go for couchettes. One time in Sweden I found that the sleepers were only 10 euro more than the couchettes, so then I took one.
So I go for couchettes. One time in Sweden I found that the sleepers were only 10 euro more than the couchettes, so then I took one.
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
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
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.
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.
20 years ago?
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.
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.
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.
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.
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.
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.
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.
> while traveling, I consider using money to be like cheating
And even on the cheap, let's keep in mind that money is central to the luxury that any tourism is. In my 90's youth, I figuratively littered the map with pushpins in countries off the path beaten by Westerners, impressing family and friends. But really, I just happened to have the privilege of taking a few months for clueless wandering with no worries about means and the knowledge that if the affair turned sour I could at any point arrange a safety net. Sure, I was a fairly cheap backpacker, but still there was no glory in such adventuring - just money. I still recommend it to anyone who can, and that experience has shaped a large part of my later life in unforeseen ways, but I have long stopped gloating about it.
And even on the cheap, let's keep in mind that money is central to the luxury that any tourism is. In my 90's youth, I figuratively littered the map with pushpins in countries off the path beaten by Westerners, impressing family and friends. But really, I just happened to have the privilege of taking a few months for clueless wandering with no worries about means and the knowledge that if the affair turned sour I could at any point arrange a safety net. Sure, I was a fairly cheap backpacker, but still there was no glory in such adventuring - just money. I still recommend it to anyone who can, and that experience has shaped a large part of my later life in unforeseen ways, but I have long stopped gloating about it.
> 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.
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.
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.
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.
> 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.
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.
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.
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.
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.
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.
And to nit pick, it's not just the EU, for example the UK is still included post Brexit.
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?
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?
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.
It's still around, I used it in 2016 aged 32.
I've not heard of any age requirements.
https://www.interrail.eu/en
I've not heard of any age requirements.
https://www.interrail.eu/en
There is a cheaper ticket for 12-27.
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.
Eurail passes (for non-EU citizens) were cheaper than interrail passes. You needed a non-EU passport, and a non-EU address.
I ordered one to my parents' house in the US and had them FexEx it to me in Europe.
I ordered one to my parents' house in the US and had them FexEx it to me in Europe.
[deleted]
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.
"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.
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.
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.
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.
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.
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.
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.
The lowland sleeper London-Glasgow/Edinburgh isn’t long enough for a good nights sleep in my view.
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!).
Couchettes are cheaper, lower-comfort bunks.
Most sleepers also offer cabins with proper beds (for a premium).
Most sleepers also offer cabins with proper beds (for a premium).
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.
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.
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.
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.
These are trains with sleeping cabins and actual beds you sleep in. It's better than many hostels.
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.
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.
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.
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.
And, yes, especially when time zones are involved, sticking to a schedule and getting exercise helps.
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.
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.
The definitely ran between Germany and the Netherlands in the 00s because I took at least one trip that way.
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)
* 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)
I think the key is to not get wasted on the train.
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.
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.
> 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!
A decent high-speed rail system would be cool!
But a decadent high speed rail system would be awesome!
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.
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.
> 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.
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.
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.
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.
You highlighted it. The real problem is when you get somewhere you still need a car.
It's possible that would gradually start to change, starting around rail stations.
That requires the area around rail stations to be built for pedestrians and bicycles, not cars. That doesn’t seem to be the case in many places in America.
Places can change! American cities were built for pedestrians in the '20s, and Dutch cities were built fir cars until the '90s.
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.
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%.
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%.
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)
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)
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.
Also for the record, the overwhelming majority of the US population lives in metropolitan areas, not rural ones.
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.
- 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.
German trains are unrealiable because they spend like 5-10 times less per km of railway than Austria or Switzerland.
This probably has a lot to do with topography of Germany compared to both Austria and Switzerland.
Also in rural Germany you will need a car anyway, even if all major cities are well connected.
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.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.
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.
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.
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?
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?
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.
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.
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.
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.
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.
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.
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.
>the vast majority of Americans used to be farmers
The vast majority of every agricultural society used to be farmers.
The vast majority of every agricultural society used to be farmers.
While you're right about average density, there are some spots with much higher density population that could certainly benefit from high speed train.
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_consp...
"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...
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/General_Motors_streetcar_consp...
"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...
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.
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.
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.
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.
> 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.
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.
I know that you were talking about individual commutes here. The city of Oslo, Norway was considering having a shared trunk in one corner, where the metro, the streetcar, and the intercity rail all shared a stretch of track. I believe it was to make efficient use of existing right-of-way. I think that there were problems due to electrification (750 V vs 15 kV) and other political problems.
There is a different section in Oslo where the streetcar and metro share a stretch of track using a clever interlocking.
There is a different section in Oslo where the streetcar and metro share a stretch of track using a clever interlocking.
"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.
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.
I kinda agree, except on the car part, because cars dominate even densely populated areas where trams, metros and buses should.
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.
Buses are a joke. We cannot have public transit here without security to match, like at airports.
I’d take this comment more seriously if there weren’t car companies that bought up rail networks and shut them down.
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?
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?
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.
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.
Washington - Atlanta with stops at Richmond, Raleigh, Charlotte. I don’t understand why this isn’t an hourly train.
> 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?
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?
>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?
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?
Environment? Comfort?
That's worth the price tag, environmental impact, and government land repossession that will be required?
Often, yes. Have you considered how the alternatives fare on those?
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.
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.
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.
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.
2.5 times faster than any train in my wealthy, western country.
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.
Should Acela be faster? Probably! But people should be clear-eyed about what the reality of the situation is.
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.
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.
And high speed in India is apparently 100mph/160kph.
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.
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.
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.
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.
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.
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.
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.
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.
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.
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.
Policy, The Koch Brothers and "eminent domain" problems in the US.
karaterobot(1)
_DeadFred_(2)
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.
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.
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.
Geneve to Munich is probably an example I experienced several times.
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.
Spain, outside of the lines connecting Vigo, Barcelona, Madrid, Malaga, axis.
Greece, anything outside Athens - Thessaloniki.
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.
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.
Maintenance cost and fuel costs are considerably lower for trains, why would they cost the same amount?
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.
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.
Lower emissions as well, which, I would hope we all care about.
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.
Don’t forget to factor in all the additional time getting to the airport and dealing with check in and security.
...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.
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.
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).
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).
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 ÖBB Nightjet. But yep, it's not only state railway companies anymore, as can be seen on the map
The situation is a lot better today than 10 years ago or so, largely thanks to ÖBB Nightjet. But yep, it's not only state railway companies anymore, as can be seen on the map
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.)
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.)
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.
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).
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.
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.
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.
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!
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!
>> 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.
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.
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.
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.
> 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.
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.
> 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.
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.
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
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.
"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 ..
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 ..
And at road crossings and passing loops and so on. Really long trains are a fairly significant logistical challenge.
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.
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
Well, it is one of the problem. Recently new tech was installed - but not at all with the idea of automatisation in mind. Apart from that I know, I often had the fun adventure of not knowing will I catch the last connection, or not.
Sure, I'm dramatically oversimplifying, but I think my point still stands: putting it another way, trains have an ability to accommodate travelers in a way that nothing else -- planes, cars, buses, etc. -- can even approach. It wouldn't be as easy as I'm making it out to be, but it also doesn't seem (in the larger picture) to be particularly challenging either.
And you're right, you'd probably have to designate a section of the train as the "getting on and off" bit, and make it easy for people to move from car to car.
And you're right, you'd probably have to designate a section of the train as the "getting on and off" bit, and make it easy for people to move from car to car.
I did <any research at all> and found the following in case anyone is interested:
1. It appears Amtrak sleeper cars accommodate between 30 and 50 people.
2. An Amtrak coach car seats up to 80 people (fewer than I expected).
3. So to switch everything to sleeper cars would require trains to be 2-3 times as long.
4. A typical Amtrak train is 11-12 cars long, and each car is about 85 feet long.
5. So Amtrak trains are currently about 1,000 feet long, which means they could be 2-3x as long and still be *well* under a mile long.
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.
The whole point is to offer sleeper accommodations. That requires more people to clean up/prepare the train for the next trip, but not (many) more for the actual operation while running. Although the goal is to get more people to take the train by making it more attractive as an option, the direct comparison is for the same number of passengers: take advantage of the flexible length of trains to provide a more compelling travel option, but with the same number of people. So no greater number of dining cars etc. -- unless you're pointing out that not everyone gets dinner on a regular trip, in which case sure, I guess.
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.
> 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.
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.
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.
Why should the individual end user be concerned about CO2 emissions? Or are we letting corporations in China outsource that guilt back to us?
Yes, because the corporations in China are emitting those making things you use.
Stuttgart to Vienna should take much less than the current 6+ hours, but the train network is heavily underinvested compared to alternatives.
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.
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.
> 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...
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...
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?
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.
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.
Roughly every fifth flight they call my name, but I never missed a flight because of late arrival.
Do you only fly through small airports? I can't see how you would possibly guarantee not getting stuck in security at least sometimes
90% yes. I don't live nor work in the major hubs, sometimes I fly through as a stopover though (in EU you don't need to go through security again). I do this on purpose - often there are several airports about the same distance from my destination, so I just pick the least used one.
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.
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.
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.
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.
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.
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.
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.
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.
The US also has over 2x as many people and wayyyy more wealth
The quality of life, in times of peace, does seem comparable to that of rural U.S.. Adding to that, U.S. households are orders of magnitude more personally indebted than Russia.
I don't buy the "wealth" argument. A nation's wealth says little about how wealthy, in practice, its residents are.
I don't buy the "wealth" argument. A nation's wealth says little about how wealthy, in practice, its residents are.
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.
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.
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.
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.
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).
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).
American Exceptionalism is unfortunately a largely incurable mental illness.
To be fair, I think every country has something that they think they're somehow the exception for
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.
Site is probably just overloaded and it's not responding properly because of it.
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.
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.
I also went through that investigational phase. Needing to do that is a very clear sign of a UX that's suboptimally designed, IMO.
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.
If you pick Paris, most major cities in Western Europe are within 8 hours.
Pick Madrid, far fewer destinations are marked.
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.
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...
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...
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.
It’s a shame they removed the night train too. I took it a few years ago, it was convenient.
https://www.seat61.com/international-trains/trains-from-Madr...
3 switches but still doable, overnight direct train was shut down after COVID unfortunately
3 switches but still doable, overnight direct train was shut down after COVID unfortunately
Siblings who can't stand each other and turn their backs to each other
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 :(
just booking a train and getting a quote crossing multiple borders (without interrail) is just a nightmare :(
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...
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...
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?
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?
They'd have to adopt transparent pricing across the union.
As someone who often crosses the borders between Germany, Austria and Italy it is basically:
1. Enter my route at ÖBB (Austrians), DB (Germans) and Trenitalia (Italians) and see who is cheapest
2. Book one ticket for the whole trip
1. Enter my route at ÖBB (Austrians), DB (Germans) and Trenitalia (Italians) and see who is cheapest
2. Book one ticket for the whole trip
Whenever I checked, trains from north Germany to Austria and back were always significantly cheaper on the ÖBB site. It was bizarre.
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.
Strange, I don't usually hear Austrians complain when they get paid 3x for the same job a person does in Poland.
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.
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.
Really? When traveling from Poland to Germany, it's cheaper to buy a ticket from DB.
I suppose it varies from case to case. I've only done Austria<->Poland, with tickets bought from AT/CZ/PL.
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.
It can't book the Eurostar as part of a larger trip and there might be similar limitations.
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 :)
Of course - they add their own fees, though I guess there's nothing wrong with using them to find a route.
Doesn't trainline support some of Europe now?
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.
It does miss some regional train tickets which could be found on local platforms but major lines are covered fine.
Wow, that's some voyage. How was it?
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).
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).
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.
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.
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.
Why isn't there a Google flights for trains? Do the operators hoard their data?
In the end you’ll just have to buy 3-4 different tickets that become obsolete once you lose your connection in Köln.
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.
..Google Maps? (Or Citymapper, or ...)
All Aboard is doing this, check them out: https://allaboard.eu/book
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.
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...
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/
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/
In Germany not so far because the train will be 2+ hours late
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.
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.
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
We need to get essential services such as public transport back under state control or the quality will continue to deteriorate
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
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
To be fair though, it's not like the trains were exactly great in the UK before privatisation.
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?
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?
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
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...
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...
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.
We should actually identify the actual technical problems and focus on spending the money to fix them.
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.
It's really good we have Italo in Italy.
Prices are down, service quality is up.
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
Under nationalisation plans were afoot to close Marylebone, today Chiltern is one of the highest rated services going
[deleted]
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.
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.
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.
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.
(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.
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.
(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?
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?
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.
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.
> 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.
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.
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.
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.
> "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.
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.
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.
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.
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.
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.
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.
France is known for being very Paris-centric in terms of transportation infrastructure.
And you will lose at least two connections.
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.
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.
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.
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.
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.
There is a website I love for seeing how to get almost everywhere in Europe by train: https://www.seat61.com/
And it gives details about everything you could imagine. It’s a gold mine for train travel through Europe!
He is a legend.
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-...
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-...
Is that a recent thing? I’ve taken trains several times of the last few years and always had an overwhelmingly positive experience.
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...
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...
> The gov't hasn't allocated enough for maintenance for several decades, and we're paying the price now.
Ah yes, the german approach.
Ah yes, the german approach.
It does amuse me somewhat that every country believes they have the worst train network, the UK is no different.
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...
Yeah, less than from Milan to my city still in Italy…
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/
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/
Another one; where you can get to without changing trains, and how long it takes: https://direkt.bahn.guru/
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.
or chain ur luggage to some iron loops found under the seats?
Don't remember, I put one laptop bag around ny middle, and larger backpack I put my legs into. However, it can be removed by a knife and opened if enough are in on it plus those not sleep. With a friend you can take guard turns.
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.
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.
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...
[deleted]
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.
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.
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.
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.
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.
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.
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.
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.
Obviously: https://www.seat61.com/
For grins and/or cringes, I'd like to see a similar site for the US.
There are a few cities with reasonably good commuter-rail service which might compare with some of the European cities. Other than that distance/hour will be a small fraction of that in the EU.
Comparisons with China and Japan might also be illuminating.
There are historical isochrone travel maps of the US, also ironically strongly influenced by railroad development, see:
<https://railroads.unl.edu/documents/view_document.php?id=rai...>
<https://www.davidrumsey.com/luna/servlet/detail/RUMSEY~8~1~2...>
There are a few cities with reasonably good commuter-rail service which might compare with some of the European cities. Other than that distance/hour will be a small fraction of that in the EU.
Comparisons with China and Japan might also be illuminating.
There are historical isochrone travel maps of the US, also ironically strongly influenced by railroad development, see:
<https://railroads.unl.edu/documents/view_document.php?id=rai...>
<https://www.davidrumsey.com/luna/servlet/detail/RUMSEY~8~1~2...>
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.
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.
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
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
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.
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.
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 =)
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)
"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)
Meanwhile in Canada https://www.cbc.ca/news/canada/montreal/via-rain-passengers-...
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.
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.
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.
Ok sure but when I say Canada I am talking about the entire country. I support a cheap, fast line connecting Toronto with its populated neighboring cities. And sure, something between Vancouver and Portland would be fine. But it is not feasible to, for example, connect Vancouver and Toronto with rail. In Europe, you can take rail from London to Athens. I want that in Canada but you have to go through vast amounts of nothingness to do so. Population IS the reason for rail failing here.
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.
Truth is that there are millions living in areas which rail makes sense but it doesn’t happen because they don’t want it.
Oops, I meant 25 million people. Point still stands.
Via rail is commonly excoriated by not just bikes. The baggage policy seems especially pointless.
I'm amazed nobody left that train except for medical emergencies.
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.
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.
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.
Amsterdam is 11 hours from Copenhagen, so from Malmø it's an extra 40 minutes or so.
There are time travel maps which not only trains, but also cars or bikes: https://commutetimemap.com/map and https://app.traveltime.com
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…
similar project:
https://www.trainconnections.com/
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.
[deleted]
Waiting for the snarky comments about the Dutch NS so I don’t have to make them :)
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...
https://www.rnz.co.nz/news/national/537619/auckland-rail-shu...
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.
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.
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%
Some numbers people from other countries can only dream about:
punctuality less than 5 minutes: 89.7% punctuality less than 15 minutes: 97.0%
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.
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.
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.
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 ..
> 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.
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.
Without checking, Brussels is probably your best starting point. You should be able to reach: Frankfurt, London, Paris, Amsterdam and many more.
Paris to Berlin is now about 8h. I thought it’d be shorter. I also think Paris to Milan is approximately the same time.
For some reason the result page keeps reloading indefinitely, and it renders the site unusable on Brave/iOS :(
8hours without counting for delays and missed connections, something that the SNCF routinely experiences.
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.
The official reason, some powerline issue.
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
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
[Edit] https://withinhours.com/ seems easy to use
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.
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.
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.
> 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.
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.
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.
> 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?
You mean most distance you can travel in X hours?
When I posted, the title on HN was "Shortest distance between stations in Europe", so it had nothing to do with "X hours".
My one and only sleeper train experience involved being woken up at 3am by police with guns to check passports. Never again.
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…
Yeah, that's sleeper train travel 101. Either be young and not too tall and on a budget, or pay for a private cabin.
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.
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.
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.
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 :)
I think when you share anecdotes like yours, its good to share anecdotes like mine, to balance it out :)
Which route? Does it still exist?
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.
Added: GP is probably talking about a train that didn't cross a border.
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
This was like two years ago or so, so still exists probably
Which route was this?
Think we killed it - needs to add some caching!
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.
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.
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.
1st class for such a distance isn't for luxury but for more space. You should check before buying anything.
Vilnius Riga connection missing
depends on the country. if you're in Ireland, only Ireland or a tiny bit of the UK
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?
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?
I'd probably agree on Paris. Maybe Berlin. But Paris is probably a better choice for historical reasons.
Paris is probably your best bet by those criteria.
Thanks
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...
This is a fantastic resource. Appreciate it..
hehe.. Varna-Sofia (Bulgaria, ~450km) is 7h.20m.. on good days, eh, nights.
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.
Driving your vehicle is the best way to go if you want to enjoy the sights on the way.
Awful UX! : /
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.
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.
> 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.
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.
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.
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.
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.
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.
> 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.
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.
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.
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.
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.
What airport in Europe has cheap or free long term parking?!??
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.
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.
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.
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.
> 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 €150 Euros and at Heathrow is roughly the same (and needs a shuttle bus to the terminal, or it is over £250 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.
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 €150 Euros and at Heathrow is roughly the same (and needs a shuttle bus to the terminal, or it is over £250 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.
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.
> 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?
If you'd have to pay for long-term parking, why not instead pay for a taxi or Uber to the train station?
Most transit systems tend to optimize getting to the city center. Getting to the airport is usually harder.
> 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.
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.
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.
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.
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.
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.
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.
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?
That's not what we were discussing, but sure I'd agree with that.
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.
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.
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.
> Train travel is a flow state/mindset thing.
This is a great point. I also find train travel the least stressful over all other means of travel.
This is a great point. I also find train travel the least stressful over all other means of travel.
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.
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.
Good luck doing that in Iberian Penisula trains.
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.
Also luggage, not all wagons are built to accommodate the typical set of plane luggage, unless one is a hand baggage traveller.
How is this different when flying?
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.
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.
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.
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.
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
More startup/shutdown overhead in exchange for bigger peak velocity
my wednesday morning train is at 0654 and i arrive by bike between 0650 and 00652.
And if you need to catch some connecting trains, forgot about connections that are less than 15 minutes apart.
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.