3 ms·

Usually locations for skiing are very well connected. Trains that go to popular skiing locations of have places to store your equipment. There are also bikes av

Usually locations for skiing are very well connected. Trains that go to popular skiing locations of have places to store your equipment. There are also bikes available at most stations. > It's my ideal version of mobility. It can decently be a lot better in a lot of ways. But we have to not just complain but try to objectively criticizes so we can continue to improve. I would like to actually do high-speed rail. Switzerland did really well improving on InterCity trains and got more people to use them. But that became almost a mantra of 'speed doesn't matter'. The actual mantra is 'not as fast as possible, but as fast as required'. This was correct and with the Rail2035 plan, we are going further in that direction. Many InterCity trains go from every 30 min to every 15 min. Basically turning most of the country into an S-Bahn like system. See here if you are interested: https://sbb-step2035.ch/de/personenverkehr/ https://sbb-step2035.ch/de/personenverkehr/ But I think beyond that we should seriously consider a totally new high-speed line, right across the major population centers. That would not just make rail competitive with driving, but beat driving with a big stick. Also this would free up a huge amount of capacity from the existing lines and allow things like 15min regional and inter-regional travel. Plus it would increase cargo capacity. Sadly its currently not in the Rail2050 plan, but there are people pushing for it. Further, I think we can do a lot, a lot better in terms of biking. Compared to the Dutch we are utterly primitive in integrating biking in the larger transport network. In the Netherlands they have figured out that bikes are the optimal feeder system into the rail network and have taken huge advantage of that. Switzerland needs to do so much better in that. Frankly, I think its really useful. I was able to perfectly travel around on Christmas. Getting to family in different parts of the country, no problem.

palata 3y ago
> That would not just make rail competitive with driving, but beat driving with a big stick. Between major population centers, I believe it already beats driving by a long shot... I personally don't think it has to be faster: as long as I can work in the train, it's fine if it takes 90min instead of 75. > Further, I think we can do a lot, a lot better in terms of biking. Yes!
- panick21_ 3y ago
  The main point is that a new main line would revolutionize local and regional transport as well. So even if you don't build a high speed one, you get a lot of benefit. But once you are building new lines, might as well make it a high-speed line. And we also should consider longer distances. Sure if you are going from Bern to Zürich 5-10min difference isn't gone be that big of a deal (well arguably if you have millions of people doing it, it does start to matter at least a little). But even if you look at Genf-Zürich, a new main line could cut that time by 40%-50%, from almost 3h to more like 1.5h. But what if you want to go from Southern France to Stuttgart or Münich. From Marseille to Zürich. We have major population density in a straight line from Genf to St.Gallen. Having a modern high speed rail connection across that population just makes sense.
  - palata 3y ago
    > Having a modern high speed rail connection across that population just makes sense. I guess I don't really understand the need for high speed. I can do Genf-St.Gallen without a problem. I can't do this as a daily commute, but that's fine. Maybe it's even a feature. I don't need high speed, I just need it to be better than using the car for long distance. Though I already prefer the train for stuff like Southern France - Stuttgart. To be frank, instead of high speed for long distance, I would rather have more night trains. And then it starts competing with planes (3/4 flights are for leisure, we need to do something about it).

palata 3y ago

> That would not just make rail competitive with driving, but beat driving with a big stick. Between major population centers, I believe it already beats driving by a long shot... I personally don't think it has to be faster: as long as I can work in the train, it's fine if it takes 90min instead of 75. > Further, I think we can do a lot, a lot better in terms of biking. Yes!

panick21_ 3y ago
The main point is that a new main line would revolutionize local and regional transport as well. So even if you don't build a high speed one, you get a lot of benefit. But once you are building new lines, might as well make it a high-speed line. And we also should consider longer distances. Sure if you are going from Bern to Zürich 5-10min difference isn't gone be that big of a deal (well arguably if you have millions of people doing it, it does start to matter at least a little). But even if you look at Genf-Zürich, a new main line could cut that time by 40%-50%, from almost 3h to more like 1.5h. But what if you want to go from Southern France to Stuttgart or Münich. From Marseille to Zürich. We have major population density in a straight line from Genf to St.Gallen. Having a modern high speed rail connection across that population just makes sense.
- palata 3y ago
  > Having a modern high speed rail connection across that population just makes sense. I guess I don't really understand the need for high speed. I can do Genf-St.Gallen without a problem. I can't do this as a daily commute, but that's fine. Maybe it's even a feature. I don't need high speed, I just need it to be better than using the car for long distance. Though I already prefer the train for stuff like Southern France - Stuttgart. To be frank, instead of high speed for long distance, I would rather have more night trains. And then it starts competing with planes (3/4 flights are for leisure, we need to do something about it).