4 ms·

It's actually absurd that it costs me ~£15-25 to fly from London Stansted to Hamburg (1 hr flight), but 145 euros (one way) to get the high speed train to Munic

It's actually absurd that it costs me ~£15-25 to fly from London Stansted to Hamburg (1 hr flight), but 145 euros (one way) to get the high speed train to Munich (6 hours). The regional trains are absurd. The platforms are completely congested with human bodies, and even the long double decker trains are often totally full. To me it seems that there simply aren't enough services every day to carry the capacity of people who want to use the trains. Even before the 9 euro ticket it was borderline unusable. I did a midday Monday journey last September from Hamburg -> Lübeck -> Stralsund -> Samtens and each part of the journey apart from the last was totally full. Lübeck -> Stralsund was ran by nah.sh but it was an absolutely tiny train with even barely any standing room, let alone seating. Germans just accept it and groan, in classic German fashion: this is how it is, it's not going to change, just accept it.

Glawen 4y ago
When I take the train in Germany, I try to make sure to have a direct train as I have been left stranded several time and missed my connection. When it happens, you are obliged to hop in the next train, where you don't have a seat reserved, and you are forced to look around for a empty seat. Of course you are not alone in this situation and you end up in a totally full train.
- locallost 4y ago
  Not really true. If you have a full price / flex ticket you can take any train you want, and if you have a discounted ticket you are obliged to go to the info desk and they will give you a connection to take. They will also give you a new reservation. Connections do get missed, and if they do you are entitled to a 25% money back for 1 hour, and 50% for two hour delays.
arcticbull 4y ago
> It's actually absurd that it costs me ~£15-25 to fly from London Stansted to Hamburg (1 hr flight) This isn't really fair. You're looking at the cheapest possible fare - a loss leader - that few people actually pay. And those that do pay it end up paying significantly more in ancillary fees. You pay ~$30 for a personal item onboard, ~$50 for a checked bag. The right way to figure out more or less what folks are actually paying to get between Stansted and Hamburg is looking at PRASM (passenger revenue per available seat mile) but I can't seem to find a published number for European LCCs.
- bowsamic 4y ago
  > You're looking at the cheapest possible fare - a loss leader - that few people actually pay. And those that do pay it end up paying significantly more in ancillary fees. Not at all. My parents visited and they didn't bring a bag. Just because Ryanair pressure you into paying more, doesn't mean that you have to. When I went home I took one carry on bag between my wife and I, so I payed the extra £20, still WAY cheaper. It's a fair comparison EDIT: I can't reply because rate limited (as always). Fuck HN. You can't seriously compare flying on Ryanair with just a carry-on rucksack to swimming the English channel. That's absurd. And even with the added baggage it is still way cheaper. You can still bring a carry-on rucksack on your Ryanair flight for that base price, and many people do. You get one carry-on for free, and have to pay for the additional carry-on and/or a checked bag. A carry-on rucksack is easily enough for a weekend visit, or even a week if you stretch it. Why are you treating it like some kind of insane thing to do? > How much time and money did you pay to get to and from the airport? How early do you need to be at the airport for check-in/boarding? How long does it take to get out of the plane and out on the street? 2 hours for check-in, and maybe an hour to get out. It doesn't cost anything to get to and from the airport for me. So sure that's a reasonable amount of time, but in the end it's still way cheaper, and I'd arrive at the HBF in advance anyway. The point is that Hamburg -> Munich should be cheaper than London -> Hamburg
  - arcticbull 4y ago
    It doesn't matter what you or your family did, it matters what folks do on average. It's possible to swim the english channel free of charge, but that doesn't make $0 a fair comparison against the train. You don't benchmark Costco by the price of its rotisserie chicken. Ryanair isn't flying planes just for you, they're flying them for average customers, so it makes sense to compare average fares. What if there's only two $15 tickets made available per flight? The problem is you don't know how many they're making available at a given price point or how they're distributed - it's a trade secret. That doesn't make cherry-picking the lowest possible value a fair comparison point.
    - InCityDreams 4y ago
reacharavindh 4y ago
This is what I wish th EU did. Instead of grand posturing and spending billions of EUR on moonshot projects and unaccountable policy projects, I wish they brought all EU nations together and spend the billions needed to do two things that I think would have quite the effect. 1. Build out a robust and modern electric grid that spans EU without country wise policy restrictions, allowing distributed domestic generation of power such as solar roofs, windmills in farms etc, while the existing nuclear reactors supply base load power. Any new renewable energy project should simply be plugged and play. 2. Build out a similar high speed rail network that doesn't have country wise signalling/power/track changes such that one does not have to worry about "connecting" Dutch, French, German, Swiss and Italian trains on a trip across.. Instead a singular train operator being able to run a train that seamlessly runs all the way through without changes. Also, while at it, make the train operators compete on EUR/KM of operation so that the costs become competitive with intra-EU flights. We are missing leaders with long term thinking. Every politician I hear keeps trying to say what their voters want to hear for the immediate term and get elected to office.
- vladvasiliu 4y ago
  > Instead a singular train operator being able to run a train that seamlessly runs all the way through without changes Isn't that the case already? Or are the high-speed trains that go from Paris to Belgium / Netherlands / Italy / Spain just regular speed outside of France? I'm quite sure, at least the ones going North (UK/BE/NL) use the same tracks as the trains doing Paris-Lille (city in the North of France, close to Belgium). > Also, while at it, make the train operators compete on EUR/KM of operation so that the costs become competitive with intra-EU flights. I don't know if that's such a good thing. There are routes that are much more profitable than others. It's my understanding that, at least in theory, the profitable ones "subsidize" the others, such that people can actually use them. I don't think that having new companies showing up on the Paris-Lyon line, for example, will be a net positive for the country as a whole (that's by far the most profitable line in France). Or maybe force the new ones to serve all the other lines? I don't know what the best solution would be.
  - GekkePrutser 4y ago
kleiba 4y ago
Full trains are not the most pleasant user experience. But from a business point of view, why wouldn't DB optimize the load and instead run half-empty trains?
- bowsamic 4y ago
  This isn't an optimisation, they aren't doing this intentionally, the network is overwhelmed
flohofwoe 4y ago
Yeah, it currently sucks, but at least there's an hourly connection from my hill-billy village to the capital (with 2x changing trains), and it seems now that getting rid of such 'non-profitable' connections is off the table for the foreseeable future. There's a lot construction work going on in the last months which is really inconvenient for travellers, but at least it shows that the Bahn is investing again in their infrastructure. I've been travelling by train between my home village and the capital for the last 20 years or so, and in general things have gotten better. More modern trains with air conditioning even far away from the big intercity connections, prices for frequent travellers are reasonable (with Bahncard 50), on average few delays (at least on my connection - the last few months have been pretty rough though). If anything, comfort on the ICE connections is regressing, I'm not a fan of the new ICE4, it feels much more cramped than the old ICE3. A few more highspeed tracks in East Germany would also be nice.
mytailorisrich 4y ago
I don't know why people expect train travel to always be cheaper than flying. Air travel does not require much costly infrastructure while building a high speed train track over hundreds of miles is very costly, especially when there's the sea in the way.
- wink 4y ago
  It's not about "cheaper", it could very well be "the train should not consistently be twice the price". Also in my personal experience planes don't simply get cancelled (or replaces with one without my reservation) 1/3 of the time, which is an actually reasonably correct number for me taking trains in Germany.
deleted 4y ago
[deleted]
Mvandenbergh 4y ago
Is it? People seem to think that planes are fancy and new and trains are old technology, therefore it's absurd that flying is cheaper. If you think about all the infrastructure that needs to be built and maintained for high speed rail that doesn't for flying, it makes a lot more sense. Also consider that high speed rail is in may ways just as technologically sophisticated and new as airplanes.
- GekkePrutser 4y ago
  Trains have much less capacity because they depend on scarce tracks. Planes have virtually unlimited airspace and are just limited by runways. So the supply/demand question is very different because the supply is more constrained for the trains.

Glawen 4y ago

When I take the train in Germany, I try to make sure to have a direct train as I have been left stranded several time and missed my connection. When it happens, you are obliged to hop in the next train, where you don't have a seat reserved, and you are forced to look around for a empty seat. Of course you are not alone in this situation and you end up in a totally full train.

locallost 4y ago
Not really true. If you have a full price / flex ticket you can take any train you want, and if you have a discounted ticket you are obliged to go to the info desk and they will give you a connection to take. They will also give you a new reservation. Connections do get missed, and if they do you are entitled to a 25% money back for 1 hour, and 50% for two hour delays.

arcticbull 4y ago

> It's actually absurd that it costs me ~£15-25 to fly from London Stansted to Hamburg (1 hr flight) This isn't really fair. You're looking at the cheapest possible fare - a loss leader - that few people actually pay. And those that do pay it end up paying significantly more in ancillary fees. You pay ~$30 for a personal item onboard, ~$50 for a checked bag. The right way to figure out more or less what folks are actually paying to get between Stansted and Hamburg is looking at PRASM (passenger revenue per available seat mile) but I can't seem to find a published number for European LCCs.

bowsamic 4y ago
> You're looking at the cheapest possible fare - a loss leader - that few people actually pay. And those that do pay it end up paying significantly more in ancillary fees. Not at all. My parents visited and they didn't bring a bag. Just because Ryanair pressure you into paying more, doesn't mean that you have to. When I went home I took one carry on bag between my wife and I, so I payed the extra £20, still WAY cheaper. It's a fair comparison EDIT: I can't reply because rate limited (as always). Fuck HN. You can't seriously compare flying on Ryanair with just a carry-on rucksack to swimming the English channel. That's absurd. And even with the added baggage it is still way cheaper. You can still bring a carry-on rucksack on your Ryanair flight for that base price, and many people do. You get one carry-on for free, and have to pay for the additional carry-on and/or a checked bag. A carry-on rucksack is easily enough for a weekend visit, or even a week if you stretch it. Why are you treating it like some kind of insane thing to do? > How much time and money did you pay to get to and from the airport? How early do you need to be at the airport for check-in/boarding? How long does it take to get out of the plane and out on the street? 2 hours for check-in, and maybe an hour to get out. It doesn't cost anything to get to and from the airport for me. So sure that's a reasonable amount of time, but in the end it's still way cheaper, and I'd arrive at the HBF in advance anyway. The point is that Hamburg -> Munich should be cheaper than London -> Hamburg
- arcticbull 4y ago
  It doesn't matter what you or your family did, it matters what folks do on average. It's possible to swim the english channel free of charge, but that doesn't make $0 a fair comparison against the train. You don't benchmark Costco by the price of its rotisserie chicken. Ryanair isn't flying planes just for you, they're flying them for average customers, so it makes sense to compare average fares. What if there's only two $15 tickets made available per flight? The problem is you don't know how many they're making available at a given price point or how they're distributed - it's a trade secret. That doesn't make cherry-picking the lowest possible value a fair comparison point.
  - InCityDreams 4y ago

reacharavindh 4y ago

This is what I wish th EU did. Instead of grand posturing and spending billions of EUR on moonshot projects and unaccountable policy projects, I wish they brought all EU nations together and spend the billions needed to do two things that I think would have quite the effect. 1. Build out a robust and modern electric grid that spans EU without country wise policy restrictions, allowing distributed domestic generation of power such as solar roofs, windmills in farms etc, while the existing nuclear reactors supply base load power. Any new renewable energy project should simply be plugged and play. 2. Build out a similar high speed rail network that doesn't have country wise signalling/power/track changes such that one does not have to worry about "connecting" Dutch, French, German, Swiss and Italian trains on a trip across.. Instead a singular train operator being able to run a train that seamlessly runs all the way through without changes. Also, while at it, make the train operators compete on EUR/KM of operation so that the costs become competitive with intra-EU flights. We are missing leaders with long term thinking. Every politician I hear keeps trying to say what their voters want to hear for the immediate term and get elected to office.

vladvasiliu 4y ago
> Instead a singular train operator being able to run a train that seamlessly runs all the way through without changes Isn't that the case already? Or are the high-speed trains that go from Paris to Belgium / Netherlands / Italy / Spain just regular speed outside of France? I'm quite sure, at least the ones going North (UK/BE/NL) use the same tracks as the trains doing Paris-Lille (city in the North of France, close to Belgium). > Also, while at it, make the train operators compete on EUR/KM of operation so that the costs become competitive with intra-EU flights. I don't know if that's such a good thing. There are routes that are much more profitable than others. It's my understanding that, at least in theory, the profitable ones "subsidize" the others, such that people can actually use them. I don't think that having new companies showing up on the Paris-Lyon line, for example, will be a net positive for the country as a whole (that's by far the most profitable line in France). Or maybe force the new ones to serve all the other lines? I don't know what the best solution would be.
- GekkePrutser 4y ago

kleiba 4y ago

Full trains are not the most pleasant user experience. But from a business point of view, why wouldn't DB optimize the load and instead run half-empty trains?

bowsamic 4y ago
This isn't an optimisation, they aren't doing this intentionally, the network is overwhelmed

flohofwoe 4y ago

Yeah, it currently sucks, but at least there's an hourly connection from my hill-billy village to the capital (with 2x changing trains), and it seems now that getting rid of such 'non-profitable' connections is off the table for the foreseeable future. There's a lot construction work going on in the last months which is really inconvenient for travellers, but at least it shows that the Bahn is investing again in their infrastructure. I've been travelling by train between my home village and the capital for the last 20 years or so, and in general things have gotten better. More modern trains with air conditioning even far away from the big intercity connections, prices for frequent travellers are reasonable (with Bahncard 50), on average few delays (at least on my connection - the last few months have been pretty rough though). If anything, comfort on the ICE connections is regressing, I'm not a fan of the new ICE4, it feels much more cramped than the old ICE3. A few more highspeed tracks in East Germany would also be nice.

mytailorisrich 4y ago

I don't know why people expect train travel to always be cheaper than flying. Air travel does not require much costly infrastructure while building a high speed train track over hundreds of miles is very costly, especially when there's the sea in the way.

wink 4y ago
It's not about "cheaper", it could very well be "the train should not consistently be twice the price". Also in my personal experience planes don't simply get cancelled (or replaces with one without my reservation) 1/3 of the time, which is an actually reasonably correct number for me taking trains in Germany.

deleted 4y ago

[deleted]

Mvandenbergh 4y ago

Is it? People seem to think that planes are fancy and new and trains are old technology, therefore it's absurd that flying is cheaper. If you think about all the infrastructure that needs to be built and maintained for high speed rail that doesn't for flying, it makes a lot more sense. Also consider that high speed rail is in may ways just as technologically sophisticated and new as airplanes.

GekkePrutser 4y ago
Trains have much less capacity because they depend on scarce tracks. Planes have virtually unlimited airspace and are just limited by runways. So the supply/demand question is very different because the supply is more constrained for the trains.