9 ms·

Sometimes I enjoy the experience, but sometimes I just want to not waste more than 40 minutes on travel time. I suppose that's just comfort/ease at the expense

Sometimes I enjoy the experience, but sometimes I just want to not waste more than 40 minutes on travel time. I suppose that's just comfort/ease at the expense of emissions.

goodpoint 5y ago
Five hours on a train between two cities are five hours of focused work on a laptop for me. With an enjoyable view and a lunch break. Compare it with flight where you spend half of the time not using your laptop or without connectivity. After COVID, how many people can do remote work? Don't underestimate the percentage of population that can use the time on a train in good ways.
- elygre 5y ago
  Yes, that! On Monday, I will travel from Basel to Berlin. By train, that’s eight continuous hours of work or whatever. By trains it’s a bus, security controls, a somewhat stressful waiting period for birding, cramped seating, waiting for luggage, waiting for a train. The three hours saved are likely to not be all that useful, since I always have a somewhat higher stress level when I fly. So, train it is.
olah_1 5y ago
How realistic is it that existing train lines get upgraded to super speed trains like they have in Japan?
- isbvhodnvemrwvn 5y ago
  Not realistic.
- baq 5y ago
  utter fantasy in the near term (10 years or so), a far fetched idea long term unless serious EU-wide legislation is introduced, which will surely be opposed by every single nation.
- johnchristopher 5y ago
  With Brussels and Belgium in the middle of the grid? Unlikely. (belgian here)
  - bregma 5y ago
    Belgium, as much a wonderland for trains as it is for beer? Brussels, which is a stop on several bullet-train-equivalent high-speed lines (Thalys, Eurostar, ICE, TGV)? If anything, putting Brussels in the centre of the high speed rail net is a good reason for it to succeed.
    - johnchristopher 5y ago
      > Brussels, which is a stop on several bullet-train-equivalent high-speed lines (Thalys, Eurostar, ICE, TGV)? Yep, that one with such tight schedules you have to systematically compensate for delays happening 3 out of 5 times by booking a train earlier than your planned connection. It cost me many hours and stress for three years when I was regularly going from East belgium to Paris/Lille. Getting to Brussels or going from Brussels should be okay but may god help you if you want to make a connection in Brussels. > If anything, putting Brussels in the centre of the high speed rail net is a good reason for it to succeed. I doubt it. It's often said of the Brussels railways hub that it is totally saturated: not enough lanes and it's impossible to add more. Among commuters it's said as a fact but I don't know if it could be improved and if it's an urban legend rehashed to ramble on late trains. My personal experience reflects that though.
- pmyteh 5y ago
  It's hard to upgrade existing routes that far - the normal maximum for upgraded 'classic' railways will be <225kph, while new high-speed railways (like the Japanese shinkansen) can go over 300kph. That said, Europe already has quite an extensive high-speed network - especially in its Western parts. The French TGV, for instance, has comparable speeds to the Japanese high speed services, and there are similar (if less complete) networks in Spain, Germany, and other countries. So a high-speed network between major centres is entirely feasible and, in fact, currently being built.
- goodpoint 5y ago
  Not necessary.
- HPsquared 5y ago
  I thought Japan's bullet trains were built from the ground up as high speed passenger rail on dedicated lines. Not really "upgrading".
- kergonath 5y ago
  Completely unrealistic. Older lines are built to older standards, with shorter-radius curves, and steeper inclines. It is more practical to just build high-speed lines separately.
poulsbohemian 5y ago
Totally agree - this perspective that one replaces the other doesn't make sense as while they both provide "travel" they do so with different tradeoffs.
laumars 5y ago
The boarding and departure adds a fair chunk of time to that too. Trains are a lot more convenient in that regard.
- VBprogrammer 5y ago
  I agree that it's more convenient, generally less time wasted in security theater and enforced shopping experience. That said, at least when you get on an airplane and it leaves the gate you have a pretty decent chance of making it to your destination when you expect to. Certainly with British trains it feels like your chance of arriving on time (to 15 minutes or so) are about 50/50.
  - pmyteh 5y ago
    Actually >90% within 10 mins (long distance) or 5 mins (short). [0] Very dependent on what route you take, though. And far from Swiss or Japanese levels of punctuality. [0]: https://www.networkrail.co.uk/who-we-are/how-we-work/performance/railway-performance/public-performance-measure-and-delay-responsibility/ https://www.networkrail.co.uk/who-we-are/how-we-work/perform...
    - VBprogrammer 5y ago
      Yeah, lies damn lies and statistics and all that. I'm sure the majority of journeys aren't long distance journeys you'd otherwise replace with flight. Certainly 50/50 was a bit of a exaggeration but when I regularly traveled between Glasgow/Edinburgh and London it wasn't far off. I received a lot of vouchers for free travel.
      - pmyteh 5y ago
        It's a National Statistic (subject to auditing and rigorous oversight from the ONS) so 'lies' is way off the mark. What it may do is not match your experiences (it varies a lot by time of day etc.), or be perfectly defined for the replacing-flights question. Both LNER (east coast) and Avanti (west coast) are fairly ordinary in long-distance terms. If the question was, say, Exeter to Newcastle by Cross Country I'd expect more extensive delays. Anyway, you can explore the data (including breakdowns by quarter, by long distance vs commuter, and by operating company).[0] [0]: https://dataportal.orr.gov.uk/statistics/performance/passenger-rail-performance/table-3114-public-performance-measure-by-operator-and-sector-periodic/ https://dataportal.orr.gov.uk/statistics/performance/passeng...
Macha 5y ago
So airlines generally recommend you get there 1 hour for a EU internal flight before your flight for security/etc. Pre-covid you could usually get away with less at a lot of airports, but even if that didn't eat up your time, I think for up to almost two hours of extra travel time I'd rather avoid the airport and all the hassle associated with modern air travel.
- rad_gruchalski 5y ago
  If you travel often, it makes sense to invest in fast track. You skip all the security theatre. Also, for example TGV requires you to be at the check in 20 minutes before. You’re a bit late, you’re screwed. Even if the train hasn’t arrived yet.
  - progval 5y ago
    > Also, for example TGV requires you to be at the check in 20 minutes before. Where? For TGV Inoui (the main brand) you have to be in the train 2 minutes before (written on any ticket, also here: https://www.sncf.com/fr/offres-voyageurs/voyager-en-train/tgv-inoui/votre-voyage/votre-embarquement https://www.sncf.com/fr/offres-voyageurs/voyager-en-train/tg...), and that's all. People flow through the gate up to the last minute. It has been like this for at least a decade. For TGV Ouigo (low-cost brand), it seems to be 30 minutes according to https://www.ouigo.com/faq?question=ai-je-pense-a-tous-avant-partir https://www.ouigo.com/faq?question=ai-je-pense-a-tous-avant-... I never understood this constraint with Ouigo though; it's obviously possible to skip it as shown by Inoui trains... and both are operated by the same company from the same train stations.
    - rad_gruchalski 5y ago
      > Where? In Brussels.
      - kergonath 5y ago
        The only case I have seen like this is the Eurostar, but that is because of customs checks, border controls, etc, which don’t exist within the Schengen area. This is a very specific case and is not representative of how most people travel by train in Europe. You don’t have to come particularly early for the Thalys in Paris, for example.
pmyteh 5y ago
Trains already beat planes in practice for city-to-city journeys with a train time of <3h, because of the time of getting to and from airports, checkin etc. London-Paris flights were decimated when the channel tunnel opened, for instance. And rail will have a decent share (on price, atmosphere, or ability to work while traveling) up to about 4.5h. Beyond that it's much harder to justify.
- logifail 5y ago
  > Trains already beat planes in practice for city-to-city journeys with a train time of <3h, because of the time of getting to and from airports, checkin etc ...and then politicians such as Ursula von der Leyen hop in their jets. This summer the EU Commission President took a 19 minute(!) flight from Vienna to Bratislava (the two cities are ~60km apart) in a private yet, but still managed to be driven ~60km by road during the transfers from central Vienna out to VIE airport and from BTS airport back to central Bratislava. https://www.diepresse.com/6055894/kritik-an-19-minuten-flug-von-der-leyen-flog-von-wien-nach-bratislava https://www.diepresse.com/6055894/kritik-an-19-minuten-flug-...
  - mathverse 5y ago
    Did she continue her trip from BTS on plane?
    - freeflight 5y ago
      > A spokesman for the EU Commission justified the flight to the "Bild" newspaper: "With departure and arrival in Belgium, the President's trip took seven countries in two days. Alternatives were examined, but there was no other logistical option." That same evening von der Leyen flew to Riga in a private plane.
  - oneplane 5y ago
    That's a weird one. I wonder what the details of that case were. Without any context it seems pretty dumb to drive 60Km and Fly 60Km when you could have just driven that 60Km of flying instead.

Sometimes I enjoy the experience, but sometimes I just want to not waste more than 40 minutes on travel time. I suppose that's just comfort/ease at the expense of emissions.

goodpoint 5y ago

Five hours on a train between two cities are five hours of focused work on a laptop for me. With an enjoyable view and a lunch break. Compare it with flight where you spend half of the time not using your laptop or without connectivity. After COVID, how many people can do remote work? Don't underestimate the percentage of population that can use the time on a train in good ways.

elygre 5y ago
Yes, that! On Monday, I will travel from Basel to Berlin. By train, that’s eight continuous hours of work or whatever. By trains it’s a bus, security controls, a somewhat stressful waiting period for birding, cramped seating, waiting for luggage, waiting for a train. The three hours saved are likely to not be all that useful, since I always have a somewhat higher stress level when I fly. So, train it is.

olah_1 5y ago

How realistic is it that existing train lines get upgraded to super speed trains like they have in Japan?

isbvhodnvemrwvn 5y ago
Not realistic.
baq 5y ago
utter fantasy in the near term (10 years or so), a far fetched idea long term unless serious EU-wide legislation is introduced, which will surely be opposed by every single nation.
johnchristopher 5y ago
With Brussels and Belgium in the middle of the grid? Unlikely. (belgian here)
- bregma 5y ago
  Belgium, as much a wonderland for trains as it is for beer? Brussels, which is a stop on several bullet-train-equivalent high-speed lines (Thalys, Eurostar, ICE, TGV)? If anything, putting Brussels in the centre of the high speed rail net is a good reason for it to succeed.
  - johnchristopher 5y ago
    > Brussels, which is a stop on several bullet-train-equivalent high-speed lines (Thalys, Eurostar, ICE, TGV)? Yep, that one with such tight schedules you have to systematically compensate for delays happening 3 out of 5 times by booking a train earlier than your planned connection. It cost me many hours and stress for three years when I was regularly going from East belgium to Paris/Lille. Getting to Brussels or going from Brussels should be okay but may god help you if you want to make a connection in Brussels. > If anything, putting Brussels in the centre of the high speed rail net is a good reason for it to succeed. I doubt it. It's often said of the Brussels railways hub that it is totally saturated: not enough lanes and it's impossible to add more. Among commuters it's said as a fact but I don't know if it could be improved and if it's an urban legend rehashed to ramble on late trains. My personal experience reflects that though.
pmyteh 5y ago
It's hard to upgrade existing routes that far - the normal maximum for upgraded 'classic' railways will be <225kph, while new high-speed railways (like the Japanese shinkansen) can go over 300kph. That said, Europe already has quite an extensive high-speed network - especially in its Western parts. The French TGV, for instance, has comparable speeds to the Japanese high speed services, and there are similar (if less complete) networks in Spain, Germany, and other countries. So a high-speed network between major centres is entirely feasible and, in fact, currently being built.
goodpoint 5y ago
Not necessary.
HPsquared 5y ago
I thought Japan's bullet trains were built from the ground up as high speed passenger rail on dedicated lines. Not really "upgrading".
kergonath 5y ago
Completely unrealistic. Older lines are built to older standards, with shorter-radius curves, and steeper inclines. It is more practical to just build high-speed lines separately.

poulsbohemian 5y ago

Totally agree - this perspective that one replaces the other doesn't make sense as while they both provide "travel" they do so with different tradeoffs.

laumars 5y ago

The boarding and departure adds a fair chunk of time to that too. Trains are a lot more convenient in that regard.

VBprogrammer 5y ago
I agree that it's more convenient, generally less time wasted in security theater and enforced shopping experience. That said, at least when you get on an airplane and it leaves the gate you have a pretty decent chance of making it to your destination when you expect to. Certainly with British trains it feels like your chance of arriving on time (to 15 minutes or so) are about 50/50.
- pmyteh 5y ago
  Actually >90% within 10 mins (long distance) or 5 mins (short). [0] Very dependent on what route you take, though. And far from Swiss or Japanese levels of punctuality. [0]: https://www.networkrail.co.uk/who-we-are/how-we-work/performance/railway-performance/public-performance-measure-and-delay-responsibility/ https://www.networkrail.co.uk/who-we-are/how-we-work/perform...
  - VBprogrammer 5y ago
    Yeah, lies damn lies and statistics and all that. I'm sure the majority of journeys aren't long distance journeys you'd otherwise replace with flight. Certainly 50/50 was a bit of a exaggeration but when I regularly traveled between Glasgow/Edinburgh and London it wasn't far off. I received a lot of vouchers for free travel.
    - pmyteh 5y ago
      It's a National Statistic (subject to auditing and rigorous oversight from the ONS) so 'lies' is way off the mark. What it may do is not match your experiences (it varies a lot by time of day etc.), or be perfectly defined for the replacing-flights question. Both LNER (east coast) and Avanti (west coast) are fairly ordinary in long-distance terms. If the question was, say, Exeter to Newcastle by Cross Country I'd expect more extensive delays. Anyway, you can explore the data (including breakdowns by quarter, by long distance vs commuter, and by operating company).[0] [0]: https://dataportal.orr.gov.uk/statistics/performance/passenger-rail-performance/table-3114-public-performance-measure-by-operator-and-sector-periodic/ https://dataportal.orr.gov.uk/statistics/performance/passeng...

Macha 5y ago

So airlines generally recommend you get there 1 hour for a EU internal flight before your flight for security/etc. Pre-covid you could usually get away with less at a lot of airports, but even if that didn't eat up your time, I think for up to almost two hours of extra travel time I'd rather avoid the airport and all the hassle associated with modern air travel.

rad_gruchalski 5y ago
If you travel often, it makes sense to invest in fast track. You skip all the security theatre. Also, for example TGV requires you to be at the check in 20 minutes before. You’re a bit late, you’re screwed. Even if the train hasn’t arrived yet.
- progval 5y ago
  > Also, for example TGV requires you to be at the check in 20 minutes before. Where? For TGV Inoui (the main brand) you have to be in the train 2 minutes before (written on any ticket, also here: https://www.sncf.com/fr/offres-voyageurs/voyager-en-train/tgv-inoui/votre-voyage/votre-embarquement https://www.sncf.com/fr/offres-voyageurs/voyager-en-train/tg...), and that's all. People flow through the gate up to the last minute. It has been like this for at least a decade. For TGV Ouigo (low-cost brand), it seems to be 30 minutes according to https://www.ouigo.com/faq?question=ai-je-pense-a-tous-avant-partir https://www.ouigo.com/faq?question=ai-je-pense-a-tous-avant-... I never understood this constraint with Ouigo though; it's obviously possible to skip it as shown by Inoui trains... and both are operated by the same company from the same train stations.
  - rad_gruchalski 5y ago
    > Where? In Brussels.
    - kergonath 5y ago
      The only case I have seen like this is the Eurostar, but that is because of customs checks, border controls, etc, which don’t exist within the Schengen area. This is a very specific case and is not representative of how most people travel by train in Europe. You don’t have to come particularly early for the Thalys in Paris, for example.

pmyteh 5y ago

Trains already beat planes in practice for city-to-city journeys with a train time of <3h, because of the time of getting to and from airports, checkin etc. London-Paris flights were decimated when the channel tunnel opened, for instance. And rail will have a decent share (on price, atmosphere, or ability to work while traveling) up to about 4.5h. Beyond that it's much harder to justify.

logifail 5y ago
> Trains already beat planes in practice for city-to-city journeys with a train time of <3h, because of the time of getting to and from airports, checkin etc ...and then politicians such as Ursula von der Leyen hop in their jets. This summer the EU Commission President took a 19 minute(!) flight from Vienna to Bratislava (the two cities are ~60km apart) in a private yet, but still managed to be driven ~60km by road during the transfers from central Vienna out to VIE airport and from BTS airport back to central Bratislava. https://www.diepresse.com/6055894/kritik-an-19-minuten-flug-von-der-leyen-flog-von-wien-nach-bratislava https://www.diepresse.com/6055894/kritik-an-19-minuten-flug-...
- mathverse 5y ago
  Did she continue her trip from BTS on plane?
  - freeflight 5y ago
    > A spokesman for the EU Commission justified the flight to the "Bild" newspaper: "With departure and arrival in Belgium, the President's trip took seven countries in two days. Alternatives were examined, but there was no other logistical option." That same evening von der Leyen flew to Riga in a private plane.
- oneplane 5y ago
  That's a weird one. I wonder what the details of that case were. Without any context it seems pretty dumb to drive 60Km and Fly 60Km when you could have just driven that 60Km of flying instead.