3 ms·

Not really. While it looks good on paper, booking some of these is quite a pain. I loved travelling by train as a kid, and would love to do it now, but when you

by mns 4y ago

Not really. While it looks good on paper, booking some of these is quite a pain. I loved travelling by train as a kid, and would love to do it now, but when you compare the offers, it's quite bad. A flight is 1:15 between 2 places of interest for me. The train routes on this map exist (used it twice), but part of it is at night but only has normal compartments. Whole train journey is 15:34 (compared to 1:15 flight), with a sleeper cart only on the last 6 hours (and that is actually at 10 am in the morning, the first part, from midnight until 10am is the normal train). Not only that, but you can't buy only one ticket, you need a ticket for the first train from one operator and another ticket from the second operator. Once we get a more unified european system that properly covers also medium size cities and not just connections between major hubs and capitals, I think more people would switch to trains.

petschge 4y ago
Things could certainly be better, but it is a but disingenuous to give the pure flight time of 1:15, when we all know that flying has quite a bit of time requirements on both ends. Not enough to bring it to 15.5 hours, but still easily enough to triple the trip time.
- throwaway29495 4y ago
  That doesn't match my experience. Flights within the EU - especially if I travel with a carry-on only - are quick and frictionless. I arrive at the airport 30 minutes before departure. I check in using a mobile app. Automatized gate with facial recognition tech takes my ID and boarding pass QR code - there are so many gates there's never a queue. The worst part of the ordeal - the security check of baggage - takes 5-10 minutes or so. I sit in the plane and we fly. At the destination I simply walk away without any queues anywhere (single duty zone...). Definitely not 3x the travel time, no way. I never had boarding take more than an hour, and it only took that long when I was going out of EU.
  - frosted-flakes 4y ago
    Don't forget that trains take you right to the city centre, but airports are outside of the city.
    - throwaway29495 4y ago
      Where I live it's 20 minutes trip from the city centre. So yep, you're right - adds some time. But not enough to add up to 3x travel time, by far. This is usually more of a concern for people traveling with lowcost airlines - these cheap out and arrive at another town's airport in many cases. National airlines like Lufthansa will take you much nearer your actual destination.
- mns 4y ago
  Of course there is, it's just that when you look at the overall picture, it's faster and more convenient. Just to give an example, as this was my general setup and still is for quite some time. One flight is at 10 PM, you can still work the whole day, go leave for the airport at around 7-7:30 PM, at 1 AM I'm at my destination (with a +1 hour timezone change), so that is about 5 hours. But can still sleep afterwards and have a full day the second day. By car you can leave at around 7 AM and best case scenario you drive 9 hours, worst case 12. Train you leave at around midnight and get there at 4 PM, but you can't actually sleep in the train as there are no sleeper carts. When it comes to cost, car is cheapest with plane and train around the same, depending when you buy the ticket. When it comes to setting everything up, car is basic, you just get in and drive, all vignettes online; plane buy ticket in one place, that is it, train a bit more complicated. I still hope we'll get better at this, because I don't believe that autonomous cars or self driving will solve anything and we should focus on trains when it comes to more environmentally friendly mass transportation.
pmontra 4y ago
High speed trains (300 km/h) can happen only between hubs because each added stop costs time and makes those train no high speed anymore. Plus congestion if every train could use the high speed tracks, unless we build four or more parallel tracks instead of the usual two. I don't see much change from the current scheme of medium speed trains (150 km/h) connecting medium sized cities and high speed between major ones. And slow trains doing every single stop for small cities, if they even have a station.
fastaguy88 4y ago
1:15 suggests a distance of less than 600 km. (45 min actual flight time). Not really a long distance train (or perhaps one with very bad connections to take 15 hr). Probably not an “average” case.

by mns 4y ago

petschge 4y ago

Things could certainly be better, but it is a but disingenuous to give the pure flight time of 1:15, when we all know that flying has quite a bit of time requirements on both ends. Not enough to bring it to 15.5 hours, but still easily enough to triple the trip time.

throwaway29495 4y ago
That doesn't match my experience. Flights within the EU - especially if I travel with a carry-on only - are quick and frictionless. I arrive at the airport 30 minutes before departure. I check in using a mobile app. Automatized gate with facial recognition tech takes my ID and boarding pass QR code - there are so many gates there's never a queue. The worst part of the ordeal - the security check of baggage - takes 5-10 minutes or so. I sit in the plane and we fly. At the destination I simply walk away without any queues anywhere (single duty zone...). Definitely not 3x the travel time, no way. I never had boarding take more than an hour, and it only took that long when I was going out of EU.
- frosted-flakes 4y ago
  Don't forget that trains take you right to the city centre, but airports are outside of the city.
  - throwaway29495 4y ago
    Where I live it's 20 minutes trip from the city centre. So yep, you're right - adds some time. But not enough to add up to 3x travel time, by far. This is usually more of a concern for people traveling with lowcost airlines - these cheap out and arrive at another town's airport in many cases. National airlines like Lufthansa will take you much nearer your actual destination.
mns 4y ago
Of course there is, it's just that when you look at the overall picture, it's faster and more convenient. Just to give an example, as this was my general setup and still is for quite some time. One flight is at 10 PM, you can still work the whole day, go leave for the airport at around 7-7:30 PM, at 1 AM I'm at my destination (with a +1 hour timezone change), so that is about 5 hours. But can still sleep afterwards and have a full day the second day. By car you can leave at around 7 AM and best case scenario you drive 9 hours, worst case 12. Train you leave at around midnight and get there at 4 PM, but you can't actually sleep in the train as there are no sleeper carts. When it comes to cost, car is cheapest with plane and train around the same, depending when you buy the ticket. When it comes to setting everything up, car is basic, you just get in and drive, all vignettes online; plane buy ticket in one place, that is it, train a bit more complicated. I still hope we'll get better at this, because I don't believe that autonomous cars or self driving will solve anything and we should focus on trains when it comes to more environmentally friendly mass transportation.

pmontra 4y ago

High speed trains (300 km/h) can happen only between hubs because each added stop costs time and makes those train no high speed anymore. Plus congestion if every train could use the high speed tracks, unless we build four or more parallel tracks instead of the usual two. I don't see much change from the current scheme of medium speed trains (150 km/h) connecting medium sized cities and high speed between major ones. And slow trains doing every single stop for small cities, if they even have a station.

fastaguy88 4y ago

1:15 suggests a distance of less than 600 km. (45 min actual flight time). Not really a long distance train (or perhaps one with very bad connections to take 15 hr). Probably not an “average” case.