6 ms·

As a European I love this. Not only because it's better for the environment but I really like trains. They are confy, fast and cheap. There's no need to pay ex

As a European I love this. Not only because it's better for the environment but I really like trains. They are confy, fast and cheap. There's no need to pay extra for your baggage, you just hop in with your stuff, take a seat, read, watch a movie, listen to a podcast or sleep for a while and you're already at your destination.

dzhiurgis 7y ago
They are not that comfortable. Sure you've got slightly more leg space than Ryanair, but difference is minimal. The only train I've really ever liked was Amtrak, but unsure whether I was somehow upgraded to their premium seats. Taking Canadian train after that was a torture. Also they are much more expensive. Which makes sense as tech itself is legacy. The cost of maintaining, lack of competition (especially with buses) is killing them. Honestly I don't see how we can't replace trains with electric buses...
- franze 7y ago
  Ok, seems like you didn't ride European trains yet.
  - lixtra 7y ago
    They are on a vast spectrum. Going from Frankfurt to Cologne second class in a train of soccer fans is very different from taking a first class ride in Switzerland.
    - bonoboTP 7y ago
      Or riding in Ukraine or Eastern Hungary. (Europe isn't just Western Europe...)
    - inferiorhuman 7y ago
      Sure, and flying up front on Cathay is a bit different from flying on, say, RyanAir. https://www.express.co.uk/travel/articles/816431/Ryanair-flight-sex-Ibiza https://www.express.co.uk/travel/articles/816431/Ryanair-fli...
  - dzhiurgis 7y ago
    I haven't done sleeper trains or really long trips. I did spend quite some time in NL and UK and took trains (2-3 hrs) in Sweden, Belgium, France, Germany and Switzerland. Probably some other countries (and many more outside of Europe). Sure it's slightly nicer than pack of sardines in an airplane, but also I'd rather negotiate armrest for 1 hour than 5.
- baot 7y ago
  Trains go at 400km/h
- yulaow 7y ago
  I don't know which trains you took but here in europe even the less costly trains (regional trains) are far far far more comfy than any ryanair airplane (saying this as a 193cm man), especially if you want to stand up often or just want to have more than two bathroom every 150 people. If you take a fast train the experience is not even remotely comparable, they are more spacious, cleaner and offer more optionals. Yeah they cost more but not really a lot more. If you have to put some extrabaggage the ryanair airplane is gonna be the loser even in the cost side. Also, personally, I prefer trains even just for the fact I have not to lose 2 extra uncomfortable hours between checkin and security checks.
  - dzhiurgis 7y ago
    As a 187 I hate pretty much every piece of transport (even most cars miss my femur length)... I used to travel Southampton to London a lot (that's like 150km or so). IIRC renting a car used to be cheaper.
    - Freak_NL 7y ago
      At 200cm, I will choose trains whenever possible. Aeroplanes are a nightmare for me.
      - himlion 7y ago
        I'm 196cm and airplanes are actually not as bad as fellow tall people always complain. I think I might have relatively short legs for my height.
    - iso1210 7y ago
      Southampton to London is £41 return for 160 mile round trip. Petrol alone will set you back half that. If there's a company willing to rent a car for 300 miles for £20, they're making a loss, and that's before you get onto parking charges. Either way the train is far faster.
  - DeusExMachina 7y ago
    Plus, train stations are often in the city centers, while airports are on the outskirts and are often not easy to reach.
- captainbland 7y ago
  You can't run electric buses at >100mph for one thing.
  - dzhiurgis 7y ago
    But you can operate them 2-5x cheaper.
    - Sharlin 7y ago
      Source for that? You need ten buses to replace a single medium-length train. To my understanding trains trade higher up-front costs (infrastructure!) to lower per-passenger-km operating costs.
      - captainbland 7y ago
        I mean just based on UK ticket costs I'd say they're not too far off the mark. If you catch a coach rather than the train it's often half the price, but the trade-off is you get stuck in traffic, they're infrequent, if they're oversubscribed there's no standing room (although coach operators rarely face this issue) and they're usually just not as fast as trains. I commuted to work by intercity coach for a couple of weeks and believe me it was no picnic - 5:30am wake time to catch a 6am coach and I often didn't get back until 8pm. Admittedly I was at the end of a route with a number of stops in several small villages nearby which exacerbated things a lot, but still! Some people do this on a long term basis and it blows my mind.
        Sharlin 7y ago
        Consumer ticket prices seem like a poor proxy for operating expenses per passenger km. For one, as you said, the quality of service is better.
    - captainbland 7y ago
      Even if so, you'd want electric buses to replace the kinds of routes currently served by regular buses - they'd hardly be a replacement for inter-city trains.
- dEnigma 7y ago
  I've never been on a train and wished that I'd taken the bus instead (or that the line was replaced by buses). The ride is much smoother, I have more space for myself and my baggage and I can more or less comfortably use the toilet.
  - dzhiurgis 7y ago
    Nor did I. But many times I've looked at train prices and bus boy did I consider. I've once missed my train in UK. Next one was something like 120 pounds vs 8 pounds for bus. I think it's the last time I've ever took bus. IMHO difference in price should start to increase as electric bus TCO is already lower than diesel. The difference in XP should increase as less noise and pollution is added. Plus adding premium seats, air suspension would make a massive difference.
- sudoaza 7y ago
  Also besides more leg space you get to walk around and go to the cafeteria. And a better view i would say, thought that's debatable, view from the plane is pretty tripy the first few times.
- ben-schaaf 7y ago
  > Honestly I don't see how we can't replace trains with electric buses... Oh geez. Even with our pretty crappy trains in Australia, I'd still take a train every time. Trains are faster, offer much smoother rides and are much more efficient than busses.
- iso1210 7y ago
  > Honestly I don't see how we can't replace trains with electric buses... I suspect you've never taken a train, or a bus.
tluyben2 7y ago
Depends on what distances you are travelling I suppose; the prices for longer travel are, imho, very high and sure it is comfy but compared to a plane? Planes are cheaper and much faster. At the same price I think many would still take the plane. If trains were vastly cheaper, then maybe it would change a lot. But only inside the Netherlands, I only know a few commuters in my circles who go by train; the rest drive a car, noting inconvenience (train then tram instead of door to door) and, more so, high prices as reason.
- bnt 7y ago
  Also, trains in the Netherlands are highly unreliable with regular unplanned shutdowns (due to natural factors like heavy rain or human factors like high suicide rates by jumping infront of trains). Also, commuters tend to be too comfortable (taking off their shoes, talking loudly on the phone or messy eating).
  - DeusExMachina 7y ago
    Man, I come from Italy and I have been living in Amsterdam for ten years now and I can assure you that the "unreliability" of Dutch trains is nothing compared to the constant huge delays and cancellations of Italian railways. Sure, there might be room for improvement in some areas, but Dutch trains are the third most punctual in the world, after Japan and Switzerland: https://www.railtech.com/policy/2019/01/03/dutch-passenger-trains-set-new-punctuality-record/?gdpr=accept https://www.railtech.com/policy/2019/01/03/dutch-passenger-t...
  - Carpetsmoker 7y ago
    Internationally speaking, trains in Netherlands are pretty good IMO. Dutch people love to complain about it because we're sticklers for being on time, but if you compare internationally Dutch trains really aren't so bad.
    - inferiorhuman 7y ago
      Internationally speaking, trains in Netherlands are pretty good IMO. Dutch people love to complain about it because we're sticklers for being on time, but if you compare internationally Dutch trains really aren't so bad. Are you suggesting that Germans and French don't enjoy a good complaint?
macspoofing 7y ago
Trains aren't cheap. Where is that coming from? Anytime I travelled in Europe, either plane or bus were the better/cheaper options.
Hamuko 7y ago
Trains are really slow actually.
- Darmody 7y ago
  200 or 300 km/h I wouldn't call that slow. Not as fast as a plane but it's not slow at all.
  - Hamuko 7y ago
    It is slow when it's directly competing with planes.
    - Darmody 7y ago
      Planes being faster doesn't mean trains are slow.
    - notahacker 7y ago
      Not so much when the train leaves direct from the city centre and you can arrive 10 mins before your departure.
      - Hamuko 7y ago
        1h 30min + whatever time I spend at the airport vs. 12 hours + 10 minutes at the train station. That's a pretty hard sell.
        notahacker 7y ago
        Most train journeys covering 1hr 30 min flights aren't 12 hours.
        Hamuko 7y ago
        Well, the domestic flight that I have taken the most in the recent years is. The train is at its fastest 8 hours and some.
switch007 7y ago
Comfort etc won’t last for long. In the UK new trains seem to mimic planes with their hard upright seats. Eg the LNER Azuma trains are horrible to travel on. They constantly cut corners on speccing trains. Ask anyone how the ride is on the new Caledonian Sleeper service...!
LunaSea 7y ago
They are absolutely not cheap and mostly slow rather than fast.
- Darmody 7y ago
  Well, that depends. 2 adults from Valencia to Madrid and with return for 70€ at a max speed of 300km/h. We should also take in consideration that planes are cheap because they have become the main mean of transport for long distances for the last decades. I can't see why we couldn't do this with trains. Invest in infrastructure and use it as much as we can.

dzhiurgis 7y ago

They are not that comfortable. Sure you've got slightly more leg space than Ryanair, but difference is minimal. The only train I've really ever liked was Amtrak, but unsure whether I was somehow upgraded to their premium seats. Taking Canadian train after that was a torture. Also they are much more expensive. Which makes sense as tech itself is legacy. The cost of maintaining, lack of competition (especially with buses) is killing them. Honestly I don't see how we can't replace trains with electric buses...

franze 7y ago
Ok, seems like you didn't ride European trains yet.
- lixtra 7y ago
  They are on a vast spectrum. Going from Frankfurt to Cologne second class in a train of soccer fans is very different from taking a first class ride in Switzerland.
  - bonoboTP 7y ago
    Or riding in Ukraine or Eastern Hungary. (Europe isn't just Western Europe...)
  - inferiorhuman 7y ago
    Sure, and flying up front on Cathay is a bit different from flying on, say, RyanAir. https://www.express.co.uk/travel/articles/816431/Ryanair-flight-sex-Ibiza https://www.express.co.uk/travel/articles/816431/Ryanair-fli...
- dzhiurgis 7y ago
  I haven't done sleeper trains or really long trips. I did spend quite some time in NL and UK and took trains (2-3 hrs) in Sweden, Belgium, France, Germany and Switzerland. Probably some other countries (and many more outside of Europe). Sure it's slightly nicer than pack of sardines in an airplane, but also I'd rather negotiate armrest for 1 hour than 5.
baot 7y ago
Trains go at 400km/h
yulaow 7y ago
I don't know which trains you took but here in europe even the less costly trains (regional trains) are far far far more comfy than any ryanair airplane (saying this as a 193cm man), especially if you want to stand up often or just want to have more than two bathroom every 150 people. If you take a fast train the experience is not even remotely comparable, they are more spacious, cleaner and offer more optionals. Yeah they cost more but not really a lot more. If you have to put some extrabaggage the ryanair airplane is gonna be the loser even in the cost side. Also, personally, I prefer trains even just for the fact I have not to lose 2 extra uncomfortable hours between checkin and security checks.
- dzhiurgis 7y ago
  As a 187 I hate pretty much every piece of transport (even most cars miss my femur length)... I used to travel Southampton to London a lot (that's like 150km or so). IIRC renting a car used to be cheaper.
  - Freak_NL 7y ago
    At 200cm, I will choose trains whenever possible. Aeroplanes are a nightmare for me.
    - himlion 7y ago
      I'm 196cm and airplanes are actually not as bad as fellow tall people always complain. I think I might have relatively short legs for my height.
  - iso1210 7y ago
    Southampton to London is £41 return for 160 mile round trip. Petrol alone will set you back half that. If there's a company willing to rent a car for 300 miles for £20, they're making a loss, and that's before you get onto parking charges. Either way the train is far faster.
- DeusExMachina 7y ago
  Plus, train stations are often in the city centers, while airports are on the outskirts and are often not easy to reach.
captainbland 7y ago
You can't run electric buses at >100mph for one thing.
- dzhiurgis 7y ago
  But you can operate them 2-5x cheaper.
  - Sharlin 7y ago
    Source for that? You need ten buses to replace a single medium-length train. To my understanding trains trade higher up-front costs (infrastructure!) to lower per-passenger-km operating costs.
    - captainbland 7y ago
      I mean just based on UK ticket costs I'd say they're not too far off the mark. If you catch a coach rather than the train it's often half the price, but the trade-off is you get stuck in traffic, they're infrequent, if they're oversubscribed there's no standing room (although coach operators rarely face this issue) and they're usually just not as fast as trains. I commuted to work by intercity coach for a couple of weeks and believe me it was no picnic - 5:30am wake time to catch a 6am coach and I often didn't get back until 8pm. Admittedly I was at the end of a route with a number of stops in several small villages nearby which exacerbated things a lot, but still! Some people do this on a long term basis and it blows my mind.
      - Sharlin 7y ago
        Consumer ticket prices seem like a poor proxy for operating expenses per passenger km. For one, as you said, the quality of service is better.
  - captainbland 7y ago
    Even if so, you'd want electric buses to replace the kinds of routes currently served by regular buses - they'd hardly be a replacement for inter-city trains.
dEnigma 7y ago
I've never been on a train and wished that I'd taken the bus instead (or that the line was replaced by buses). The ride is much smoother, I have more space for myself and my baggage and I can more or less comfortably use the toilet.
- dzhiurgis 7y ago
  Nor did I. But many times I've looked at train prices and bus boy did I consider. I've once missed my train in UK. Next one was something like 120 pounds vs 8 pounds for bus. I think it's the last time I've ever took bus. IMHO difference in price should start to increase as electric bus TCO is already lower than diesel. The difference in XP should increase as less noise and pollution is added. Plus adding premium seats, air suspension would make a massive difference.
sudoaza 7y ago
Also besides more leg space you get to walk around and go to the cafeteria. And a better view i would say, thought that's debatable, view from the plane is pretty tripy the first few times.
ben-schaaf 7y ago
> Honestly I don't see how we can't replace trains with electric buses... Oh geez. Even with our pretty crappy trains in Australia, I'd still take a train every time. Trains are faster, offer much smoother rides and are much more efficient than busses.
iso1210 7y ago
> Honestly I don't see how we can't replace trains with electric buses... I suspect you've never taken a train, or a bus.

tluyben2 7y ago

Depends on what distances you are travelling I suppose; the prices for longer travel are, imho, very high and sure it is comfy but compared to a plane? Planes are cheaper and much faster. At the same price I think many would still take the plane. If trains were vastly cheaper, then maybe it would change a lot. But only inside the Netherlands, I only know a few commuters in my circles who go by train; the rest drive a car, noting inconvenience (train then tram instead of door to door) and, more so, high prices as reason.

bnt 7y ago
Also, trains in the Netherlands are highly unreliable with regular unplanned shutdowns (due to natural factors like heavy rain or human factors like high suicide rates by jumping infront of trains). Also, commuters tend to be too comfortable (taking off their shoes, talking loudly on the phone or messy eating).
- DeusExMachina 7y ago
  Man, I come from Italy and I have been living in Amsterdam for ten years now and I can assure you that the "unreliability" of Dutch trains is nothing compared to the constant huge delays and cancellations of Italian railways. Sure, there might be room for improvement in some areas, but Dutch trains are the third most punctual in the world, after Japan and Switzerland: https://www.railtech.com/policy/2019/01/03/dutch-passenger-trains-set-new-punctuality-record/?gdpr=accept https://www.railtech.com/policy/2019/01/03/dutch-passenger-t...
- Carpetsmoker 7y ago
  Internationally speaking, trains in Netherlands are pretty good IMO. Dutch people love to complain about it because we're sticklers for being on time, but if you compare internationally Dutch trains really aren't so bad.
  - inferiorhuman 7y ago
    Internationally speaking, trains in Netherlands are pretty good IMO. Dutch people love to complain about it because we're sticklers for being on time, but if you compare internationally Dutch trains really aren't so bad. Are you suggesting that Germans and French don't enjoy a good complaint?

macspoofing 7y ago

Trains aren't cheap. Where is that coming from? Anytime I travelled in Europe, either plane or bus were the better/cheaper options.

Hamuko 7y ago

Trains are really slow actually.

Darmody 7y ago
200 or 300 km/h I wouldn't call that slow. Not as fast as a plane but it's not slow at all.
- Hamuko 7y ago
  It is slow when it's directly competing with planes.
  - Darmody 7y ago
    Planes being faster doesn't mean trains are slow.
  - notahacker 7y ago
    Not so much when the train leaves direct from the city centre and you can arrive 10 mins before your departure.
    - Hamuko 7y ago
      1h 30min + whatever time I spend at the airport vs. 12 hours + 10 minutes at the train station. That's a pretty hard sell.
      - notahacker 7y ago
        Most train journeys covering 1hr 30 min flights aren't 12 hours.
        Hamuko 7y ago
        Well, the domestic flight that I have taken the most in the recent years is. The train is at its fastest 8 hours and some.

switch007 7y ago

Comfort etc won’t last for long. In the UK new trains seem to mimic planes with their hard upright seats. Eg the LNER Azuma trains are horrible to travel on. They constantly cut corners on speccing trains. Ask anyone how the ride is on the new Caledonian Sleeper service...!

LunaSea 7y ago

They are absolutely not cheap and mostly slow rather than fast.

Darmody 7y ago
Well, that depends. 2 adults from Valencia to Madrid and with return for 70€ at a max speed of 300km/h. We should also take in consideration that planes are cheap because they have become the main mean of transport for long distances for the last decades. I can't see why we couldn't do this with trains. Invest in infrastructure and use it as much as we can.