13 ms·

About 20 years ago, I visited most of Europe’s major cities over the course of a two-month trip, traveling primarily by night train. Each overnight ride saved m

• inglor_cz 2y ago
  I like trains, but I was never refreshed and well-rested after a night journey in a sleeper car. It just twists and jumps too much (extra points for curvy tracks where you end up with your head slightly downwards from your body half of the time), plus many railway stations on the way have way too loud announcements, plus the border police likes to check even when it theoretically shouldn't (Schengen). I just can't manage to get deep uninterrupted sleep in such conditions.
• ant6n 2y ago
  The state railways have large exited night trains as a form of transport, due to economics, although it’s a much more sustainable form of transportation compared to aviation. Since Europe has a liberalized market in the rail sector, some startups are trying to fill the gap. European sleeper operates a night train on the route Brussel-Amsterdam-Berlin-Prague, using old rented rolling stock. I’m involved with Luna Rail (in Berlin), which is trying a more technical approach around rolling stock design to improve unit economics to make Night trains profitable. There’s also a startup in the US, dreamstar, whose primary effort appears to be about getting track rights for now (something that’s not such a big concern in Europe - here the barrier is rolling stock).
  • endless1234 2y ago
    I'm sure you know of this, but just sharing the map for others: https://projectmapping.co.uk/Reviews/Resources/Europe%20night%20trains%20Juri%20Maier.jpg https://projectmapping.co.uk/Reviews/Resources/Europe%20nigh... The situation is a lot better today than 10 years ago or so, largely thanks to ÖBB Nightjet. But yep, it's not only state railway companies anymore, as can be seen on the map
  • sandworm101 2y ago
    >> a much more sustainable form of transportation compared to aviation. Night trains are not like normal trains. They carry far fewer passengers per car. That doesn't make them as bad as flying on pure CO2 emissions, but night trains are not as efficient as "trains" generally. They are more comparable to luxury busses. But ... if the other option is an electric car, or even an electric aircraft, then even an electric night trains will likely no longer win on CO2 emissions.
    • lostlogin 2y ago
      > night trains will likely no longer win on CO2 emissions. The comparison is more complicated though isn’t it? It isn’t a comparison with a plane, it’s a variable comparison with a plane, a taxi, and a hotel etc.
    • ant6n 2y ago
      Seating rail cars have 70-90 seats, whereas couchettes have 40-66 beds, but at lower emissions (lower speed->less drag) and higher occupancy (in Germany, occupancy is around 50% for day trains). It’s pretty much a wash. If you mean luxury sleepers, they’re worse sure. None of the startups are really targeting those luxury/low density levels, because of the overall poor impact. Flying has around 10x the co2eq emissions of trains (300g/km, including infrastructure, occupancy). Cars are still pretty bad, but also don’t compete well for 1000km trips in Europe. It’s basically only aviation at those distances. Electric airplanes that can do 1000km trips don’t exist. They may exist one day in significant quantities… but perhaps only after we’ve used up all our carbon budget on the path to a 2-3C increase.
  • ghaff 2y ago
    I've taken a few night trains. They were mostly a fun experience, but they weren't in general especially time or cost efficient (though you have to factor in saving a night of hotel). It also helps if you're generally going city center to city center and aren't lugging large suitcases around. (Which you might think would be a better fit for trains but really aren't for the most part.)
  • physhster 2y ago
    I've been wondering how long it would take for a startup to figure out how to build train cars for cheaper than the incumbents. I know it's hard, but not as hard as building airplanes... As long as the authorities agree to certify them, and I could see a lot of corruption there.
    • ant6n 2y ago
      The unit economics for Night trains are in the operation. U want your cars to minimize operating cost, which may actually make the asset costs more expensive (at least at first).
  • JBlue42 2y ago
    Curious about the issues you're having with rolling stock. Given Germany's industrial prowess, I would've thought that that wouldn't be an issue to manufacture, either for domestic use or export.
    • ant6n 2y ago
      For startups, building up the financing for buying rolling stock is very difficult. There’s currently very little available on the rental market. It’s difficult to just do a startup on general in this space (it’s sustainable mobility, but involves hardware, an old industry, old tech). The state railways can afford rolling stock, but it’s extensive and takes a long time. They are not too innovative either, so may not solve the economics issues with new approaches, because they are too conservative.
      • JBlue42 2y ago
        Ah, I had interpreted your statements as an issue of manufacture and availability, not financing. As to finance, it does suck that we throw billions at economically, socially, and/or globally destructive, unprofitable startups and yet something that is a net good for society and environment can't get that funding. I guess that's where government steps in or private/public partnerships. Good luck though!
• yndoendo 2y ago
  I would travel more around the USA if we had a decedent high-speed rail system. Spent too much time flying, red-eyes, and driving for work, 7-12+ hours one way, and hate those modes of transportation. They may get you from point A to B but your time is wasted along with the enjoyment of the trip. Unfortunately the Oil industry won over the politicians in the USA with donations, legal bribes, and they prevent the building of quality train travel. Bet that if majority of the USA left and spent time in countries with quality rail system, they attitudes would change dramatically and push for better. They would experience how much time they waste in traffic and queuing for boarding and de-bordering.
  • likeabatterycar 2y ago
    Can you provide sources for the Big Oil conspiracy you cite? Because nationwide high speed rail isn't as easy - or practical - as you think. California hadn't been able to build a train a fraction of that distance without delays and squandering massive amounts of money. The PNW has been unable to build it from Portland to Vancouver. The US is many times larger than any European country or Japan. There are US states similar in size to EU countries with comparable rail networks. The US literally invented air travel, which made traveling long distances by train largely obsolete. Aircraft aren't limited to where they can go by rails. So please explain with all these concrete examples of failure how it's a corporate conspiracy and not general purpose government ineptitude?
    • thatcat 2y ago
      China, Russia, and India have high speed rail. Can you cite the reasons that these large countries are capable of building high speed rail while the US is not? Where is the recent innovation in US air travel? It has gotten considerably worse over the last 30 years. Supersonic passenger flights stopped in 2003 around the same time that TSA added hours to every flight.
      • karaterobot 2y ago
        [flagged]
• likeabatterycar 2y ago
  > There used to be a similar service between Toronto and Montreal (both directions), where the train would pause for several hours midway so passengers would arrive at around 7:30 a.m. well-rested. That trip is 1h 15m by air with 30 flights a day each way. That train doesn't exist anymore because it's impractical and people's time is valuable. We stopped taking Conestoga wagons from New York to California for the same reason.
  • sebtron 2y ago
    That was an example of a train going slower on purpose to let people sleep a full night. A regular high-spees train could do that trip in 2-3 hours, beating a 1:15 flight in convenience by a huge margin.
    • throw5959 2y ago
      Since we're citing European trains, let's also cite European airports - I can arrive to the airport for an EU flight 20 minutes before take off and still have plenty of time to get everything sorted out. And I'm out of the airport within 15 minutes after landing - usually stepping right into a subway or something. I don't think it's such a huge margin if you fix your airports, which is going to be many orders of magnitude cheaper than building high speed rail from everywhere to everywhere.
      • thecopy 2y ago
        While i agree that EU airports are very efficient, 20 minutes before schedule take-off must be impossible. Surely you mean 20 minutes before boarding starts?
        • throw5959 2y ago
          No, I'm usually the last person to board. Departure (but not arrival) frequently gets pushed back by 10-20 minutes, though I am making it on time even if not. I have literally never waited at a security check and it takes a minute or two to get through - speaking about EU flights.
• Beijinger 2y ago
  "I’d arrive in a new city each morning feeling refreshed because of the train’s sleeping accommodations." Aeh, where were you travelling? Many countries did not have sleeper trains. Don't get me wrong. I did the same, travelling at night in trains, and it saved me a night in a hotel. But I did not arrive well rested, I arrived train wrecked.
  • airstrike 2y ago
    20 years ago?
    • Beijinger 2y ago
      Yes. It was called Interrail. You had to have an EU Passport to buy this ticket. And be below 26 years of age. I think it still exits.
      • brabel 2y ago
        I travelled Europe on night trains almost exactly 20 years ago as well, and I was not an EU citizen back then... I guess I just paid more than with interrail? Just wanted to mention it was possible, and must've been pretty cheap as I was broke as hell at the time.
        • rconti 2y ago
          Eurail passes (for non-EU citizens) were cheaper than interrail passes. You needed a non-EU passport, and a non-EU address. I ordered one to my parents' house in the US and had them FexEx it to me in Europe.
      • ben_w 2y ago
        It's still around, I used it in 2016 aged 32. I've not heard of any age requirements. https://www.interrail.eu/en https://www.interrail.eu/en
        • bpye 2y ago
• throw__away7391 2y ago
  > I’d arrive in a new city each morning feeling refreshed because of the train’s sleeping accommodations. Oh man this has definitely not been my experience! Last I tried this I booked a "VIP" sleeper car with a private bathroom/shower, and it was anything but. The constant shaking of the train side to side coupled with a bunch of young American girls running up and down the halls screaming to each other all night meant I didn't get any sleep at all. To make things worse, the same girls making noise all night used up all the water, leaving me covered in soap with no way to rinse it off, and still 8+ hours until my hotel check-in. I can usually sleep anywhere regardless of noise or light or mattress quality, but sleeping a train is a new category of difficulty.
  • TowerTall 2y ago
    the key is earplugs
    • throw__away7391 2y ago
      and bring my own water I guess
• kortilla 2y ago
  Sleeper cars in the US cost more than a hotel for a night. Saving the cost of a hotel is not really a selling point
  • gcanyon 2y ago
    This is the part that really frustrates me. Not that I've researched, but it seems like trains should have basically unlimited space for passengers, at very little increase in cost -- a five-mile-long train takes maybe 1-2 more people to operate than a 1-mile train? So why doesn't the U.S. lean into the sleeper concept? If we could increase speeds to 90mph and have affordable sleeper cars, trips of up to 1,000 miles would be conveniently achievable -- that's Chicago to Dallas, Los Angeles to Denver, or Miami to Washington, D.C.
    • kccqzy 2y ago
      Do you not expect attendants on these trains? And since your train only travels at 90mph you will need a larger number of dining cars and their associated cooks and waiters/waitresses.
      • gcanyon 2y ago
        The whole point is to offer sleeper accommodations. That requires more people to clean up/prepare the train for the next trip, but not (many) more for the actual operation while running. Although the goal is to get more people to take the train by making it more attractive as an option, the direct comparison is for the same number of passengers: take advantage of the flexible length of trains to provide a more compelling travel option, but with the same number of people. So no greater number of dining cars etc. -- unless you're pointing out that not everyone gets dinner on a regular trip, in which case sure, I guess.
    • gcanyon 2y ago
      I did <any research at all> and found the following in case anyone is interested: 1. It appears Amtrak sleeper cars accommodate between 30 and 50 people. 2. An Amtrak coach car seats up to 80 people (fewer than I expected). 3. So to switch everything to sleeper cars would require trains to be 2-3 times as long. 4. A typical Amtrak train is 11-12 cars long, and each car is about 85 feet long. 5. So Amtrak trains are currently about 1,000 feet long, which means they could be 2-3x as long and still be *well* under a mile long. This seems easily doable. As others have pointed out, super-long trains have a number of issues, but trains could accommodate almost 2x the passengers, and be all-sleeper, and still be only a mile long. Then you run multiple trains to handle the larger demand!