Trains in Europe
Nov 15th, 2006, 01:50 PM
#41
Join Date: Feb 2006
Posts: 2,206
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
>What most amazed me, was the only train we rode that carried a significant number of passengers was an ICE from Essen to Nürnberg on a Friday at around 3:00pm.
If you travel in the middle of the week the trains are indeed mostly empty. However: if the train is not available at any given time it won't be used at times when _most_ people need it. Basically, you either have to operate a rail line hourly or you can close it.
And even when DB stock goes to the market not much changes. It doesn't work like it did in the USA - look where it brought the public transit there. Rather the local communities or states "buy" a number of train connections from the DB. This mode of operation won't go away once DB stock doesn't belong to the state any more.
If you travel in the middle of the week the trains are indeed mostly empty. However: if the train is not available at any given time it won't be used at times when _most_ people need it. Basically, you either have to operate a rail line hourly or you can close it.
And even when DB stock goes to the market not much changes. It doesn't work like it did in the USA - look where it brought the public transit there. Rather the local communities or states "buy" a number of train connections from the DB. This mode of operation won't go away once DB stock doesn't belong to the state any more.
Nov 15th, 2006, 02:05 PM
#42
Join Date: Feb 2005
Posts: 9,017
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
>won't go away
Well, they'll simply shut down that rail line and open a bus line to the next bigger railway station. It's what has been done to so many rural places, there's no connection left to "buy". All the investor wants are routes that earn money. The local communities don't have the money to buy anything.
Well, they'll simply shut down that rail line and open a bus line to the next bigger railway station. It's what has been done to so many rural places, there's no connection left to "buy". All the investor wants are routes that earn money. The local communities don't have the money to buy anything.
Nov 16th, 2006, 06:50 AM
#43
Join Date: Jun 2003
Posts: 3,652
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
Well all very interesting to me. Privitization in UK has not resulted in significantly better service IMO and there to rural lines have been axed or local authorities forced to pay huge subsidies.
I've noticed DB has actually spun off many sidelines to companies like Connex i believe, so this is probably already beginning - the concentration of service and profits on main high-speed lines that compete with airlines.
My UK rail magazine monthly lists lines that DB is threatening to close.
Oh well, as a visitor i still love those German trains and train stations, lively mini-cities all in themselves.
I've noticed DB has actually spun off many sidelines to companies like Connex i believe, so this is probably already beginning - the concentration of service and profits on main high-speed lines that compete with airlines.
My UK rail magazine monthly lists lines that DB is threatening to close.
Oh well, as a visitor i still love those German trains and train stations, lively mini-cities all in themselves.
Nov 16th, 2006, 07:44 AM
#44
Join Date: Feb 2005
Posts: 9,017
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
At this moment, politicians aim to seperate tracks and trains. Tracks should belong to the state while serveral companies should be able to rent the right to use them with teir own equipment. DB as well as the union are strongly opposed to this concept. Right now, DB uses all the power it has (and it's quite powerful) to hinder other companies form opeating. Just one thing is to scrap almost new (60/70ties trains and other hardware, so that others can't buy it. It has to be said that this is public property...
Nov 16th, 2006, 08:36 AM
#45
Join Date: Feb 2006
Posts: 2,206
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
> Tracks should belong to the state while serveral companies should be able to rent the right to use them with teir own equipment.
It does make sense actually - the tracks are what they call a "natural monopoly" (meaning that if a track network covers a certain area it doesn't make sense to build a competing system of the same kind in the same area) and operating trains on them isn't. In any kind of a "natural monopoly" the reasonable way to operate is either to keep it public (government-owned) or to slap heavy regulation on the owner so that it isn't more efficient after that. On the other side operating trains, which is not a NM, is more efficient in a market-oriented way... or at least it can be.
(that said - in Japan they privatized the railway system about 10 years ago with mostly positive effects... and in Switzerland about 1/2 of the network, especially countryside branch lines, always were and remain in private or semi-private hand. So a privatization CAN lead to service degradation, but it doesn't need to)
Another example of successful deregulation is the telecommunication market: in Germany the deregulation was very successful (from consumers' point of view), in Switzerland moderately successful and in UK as far as I know rather useless...
It does make sense actually - the tracks are what they call a "natural monopoly" (meaning that if a track network covers a certain area it doesn't make sense to build a competing system of the same kind in the same area) and operating trains on them isn't. In any kind of a "natural monopoly" the reasonable way to operate is either to keep it public (government-owned) or to slap heavy regulation on the owner so that it isn't more efficient after that. On the other side operating trains, which is not a NM, is more efficient in a market-oriented way... or at least it can be.
(that said - in Japan they privatized the railway system about 10 years ago with mostly positive effects... and in Switzerland about 1/2 of the network, especially countryside branch lines, always were and remain in private or semi-private hand. So a privatization CAN lead to service degradation, but it doesn't need to)
Another example of successful deregulation is the telecommunication market: in Germany the deregulation was very successful (from consumers' point of view), in Switzerland moderately successful and in UK as far as I know rather useless...
Nov 16th, 2006, 09:26 AM
#46
Join Date: Jun 2003
Posts: 3,652
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
<Switzerland about 1/2 of the network, especially countryside branch lines, always were and remain in private or semi-private hand>
altamiro - are these really private or even semi-private? I don't know but clarify my idea that local governments largely run and fund lines like the BLS and other non-SBB lines? Or are they indeed private in the sense that they are owned by private profit-making interests - with subsidies from local governments, which to me makes them not really private, or truly private without subsidies, except of course for track infrastrcutre, which much like roads, are largely state-owned.
??? Thanks.
altamiro - are these really private or even semi-private? I don't know but clarify my idea that local governments largely run and fund lines like the BLS and other non-SBB lines? Or are they indeed private in the sense that they are owned by private profit-making interests - with subsidies from local governments, which to me makes them not really private, or truly private without subsidies, except of course for track infrastrcutre, which much like roads, are largely state-owned.
??? Thanks.
Nov 16th, 2006, 10:00 AM
#47
Join Date: Jan 2003
Posts: 74,699
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
Anyone who thinks that privatizing rail lines is a good idea need only look at the US.
It is almost impossible to get anywhere by train, and if you can, freight takes precedence over passenger traffic.
As far as the State owning the track and renting the right to use the track:
Who pays upkeep on the tracks?
Which trains will have precedence?
Who will set fares?
Will the private companies be able to choose which cities and towns they will serve?
If it ain't broke, don't fix it.
It is almost impossible to get anywhere by train, and if you can, freight takes precedence over passenger traffic.
As far as the State owning the track and renting the right to use the track:
Who pays upkeep on the tracks?
Which trains will have precedence?
Who will set fares?
Will the private companies be able to choose which cities and towns they will serve?
If it ain't broke, don't fix it.
Nov 16th, 2006, 10:30 AM
#49
Join Date: Feb 2006
Posts: 2,206
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
Many rail companies in Switzerland are private (in the sense of that they are profit-oriented, see RhB or MGB for an example) and public at the same time (the stock is not sold on the market freely but is held in the hand of some local government or controlled by it). It is not necessary a contradiction. Yes they do receive subsidies from the federal government because it is largely a consensus among the voting citizens that you have to be able to reach your goal without an own car and that people are ready for a part of their taxes to be directed this way.
>As far as the State owning the track and renting the right to use the track:
Who pays upkeep on the tracks?
The difference between the actual revenue and the needs will come from the taxpayer, either directly (from the federal level down) or through the local authorities.
>Which trains will have precedence?
This would be a political decision at the local/regional level, not a purely commercial decision. It is to expect that the person transport will keep having precedence.
>Who will set fares?
A consensus among the rail operators. It is nothing new - whenever you have a look around a big city in Germany (Karlsruhe is the best example, but not the only one) you will see a "Tarifverbund" or a "Verkehrsverbund". This means that all the operators set the prices together, the tickets are valid on the trains and buses of all operators, and then the operators squabble among each other for who gets a how big slice of the pie. But first the pie is earned together.
>Will the private companies be able to choose which cities and towns they will serve?
Look up Albtal Verkehrsgesellschaft, AVG (OK, it belongs to the city of Karlsruhe and the state of Baden-Württemberg, but also to EnBW) and see how it should and can be done.
Many Americans and British seem to believe that a successful commercial enterprise and governmental ownership of the company are somehow mutually exclusive. It is not, as the examples of Volkswagen or Toyota illustrate.
>As far as the State owning the track and renting the right to use the track:
Who pays upkeep on the tracks?
The difference between the actual revenue and the needs will come from the taxpayer, either directly (from the federal level down) or through the local authorities.
>Which trains will have precedence?
This would be a political decision at the local/regional level, not a purely commercial decision. It is to expect that the person transport will keep having precedence.
>Who will set fares?
A consensus among the rail operators. It is nothing new - whenever you have a look around a big city in Germany (Karlsruhe is the best example, but not the only one) you will see a "Tarifverbund" or a "Verkehrsverbund". This means that all the operators set the prices together, the tickets are valid on the trains and buses of all operators, and then the operators squabble among each other for who gets a how big slice of the pie. But first the pie is earned together.
>Will the private companies be able to choose which cities and towns they will serve?
Look up Albtal Verkehrsgesellschaft, AVG (OK, it belongs to the city of Karlsruhe and the state of Baden-Württemberg, but also to EnBW) and see how it should and can be done.
Many Americans and British seem to believe that a successful commercial enterprise and governmental ownership of the company are somehow mutually exclusive. It is not, as the examples of Volkswagen or Toyota illustrate.
Nov 16th, 2006, 11:36 AM
#50
Join Date: Jun 2003
Posts: 3,652
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
Or you could cite the largely former nationalised airlines of Europe as such? Ryanair wants to buy Aer Lingus!
But i agree - public transportation should be a public entity or public-controlled non-profit entity propped up by tax moneys - indeed free public transit could reap huge benefits for the environment and even taxpayers who would not have to build so many roads perhaps.
I like the Swiss way very much.
But i agree - public transportation should be a public entity or public-controlled non-profit entity propped up by tax moneys - indeed free public transit could reap huge benefits for the environment and even taxpayers who would not have to build so many roads perhaps.
I like the Swiss way very much.
Nov 16th, 2006, 11:57 AM
#51
Join Date: Feb 2006
Posts: 2,206
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
...free public transit
But it isn't supposed to be free. It is supposed to just get the costs back in, out of fares, advertising and whatever else. The taxpayer has to jump into the breach as a last resort, not as a standard. If the year is good ant the organisation makes profit, wonderful.
Working public transit network is an asset for a society (often resulting in generally increasing incomes, better health etc.) and it often makes perfect economical sense to keep it running. In some cases, a market approach IS the best way to reach this goal; in other, it isn't, or at least not in the pure form.
But it isn't supposed to be free. It is supposed to just get the costs back in, out of fares, advertising and whatever else. The taxpayer has to jump into the breach as a last resort, not as a standard. If the year is good ant the organisation makes profit, wonderful.
Working public transit network is an asset for a society (often resulting in generally increasing incomes, better health etc.) and it often makes perfect economical sense to keep it running. In some cases, a market approach IS the best way to reach this goal; in other, it isn't, or at least not in the pure form.
Nov 16th, 2006, 12:47 PM
#52
Join Date: Oct 2005
Posts: 157
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
Paris>Berlin>Vienna>Salzburg>Madrid,
As hopscotch says, you can cover many miles in your sleep, and cut hotel bills, if you book sleepers. The reference library of a city near you may have the Thomas Cook European Rail Timetable. This shows these trains with 2 and 3 berth sleepers, some have restaurant cars, and some, generally expensive, have showers.
Paris Nord 2046 to Berlin 0811. Restaurant car to midnight
Berlin 2043 via Salzburg, not Prague, to Vienna 0906
Salzburg 1903, Restaurant car, Munich 2034 to 2056, to Paris 0658
Paris 1943 to Madrid 0913 Restaurant car
Madrid 1900 Paris 0827, Restaurant car
These trains tend to be on time, but an hour’s delay is no problem, as you have longer to dress and often to take breakfast.
As has been said, you can phone or email Euraide to ask whether to buy railpasses or point top point tickets. In Britain and the USA certain other agents book berths and seats. You can send e mails and phone calls to three or four agents for estimates and bookings for the rail fares. For international tickets, berths and seats Trains Europe say they are ten percent cheaper than German Rail UK or Ffestiniog Travel. For domestic Italian trains they are cheaper again. German Rail UK are cheaper than Trainseurope or Ffestiniog Travel for domestic trains within Germany and Austria and may be competitive with them for international trips with a big proportion of miles in Germany.
In North America RailEurope offer cheapest costs where the ticketing system is adminstered by SNCF: France, Thalys trains, Eurostar, TGV's into Switzerland and Italy. For Germany, Switzerland, Austria and Eastern Europe, the ticket prices on RailEurope are often 50-80% over the prices taken by other agents. Also, RailEurope ignores many train routes (even important ones like the Brenner corridor from Munich via Innsbruck to Italy) and many local trains. Before you buy from RailEurope please check out the local rail companies so you know what prices other agents, and national rail systems, charge.
Budget Europe Travel Service, phone 800-441-9413 or 800-441-2387, site http://www.budgeteuropetravel.com/
Euraide of Florida, E-mail [email protected], phone
at the Florida office 941/480-1555, site http://www.euraide.com
Trains Europe of Cambridgeshire E-mail [email protected], phone 00 44 900 195 0101, site http://www.trainseurope.co.uk/ -
Ffestiniog Travel of Wales, E-mail [email protected], phone
00 44 176 651 2400, site http://www.festtravel.co.uk,
Inside France (Canterbury). E-mail [email protected], phone
00 44 122 745 0088, site www.rail-canterbury.co.uk/.
German Rail UK in Surbiton. E-mail: [email protected], phone
00 44 870 243 5363, site http://www.deutsche-bahn.co.uk,
Railwise Ltd in London. E-mail: [email protected], phone
00 44 207 242 1490, site http://railwise.com
Ben Haines, London
[email protected]
As hopscotch says, you can cover many miles in your sleep, and cut hotel bills, if you book sleepers. The reference library of a city near you may have the Thomas Cook European Rail Timetable. This shows these trains with 2 and 3 berth sleepers, some have restaurant cars, and some, generally expensive, have showers.
Paris Nord 2046 to Berlin 0811. Restaurant car to midnight
Berlin 2043 via Salzburg, not Prague, to Vienna 0906
Salzburg 1903, Restaurant car, Munich 2034 to 2056, to Paris 0658
Paris 1943 to Madrid 0913 Restaurant car
Madrid 1900 Paris 0827, Restaurant car
These trains tend to be on time, but an hour’s delay is no problem, as you have longer to dress and often to take breakfast.
As has been said, you can phone or email Euraide to ask whether to buy railpasses or point top point tickets. In Britain and the USA certain other agents book berths and seats. You can send e mails and phone calls to three or four agents for estimates and bookings for the rail fares. For international tickets, berths and seats Trains Europe say they are ten percent cheaper than German Rail UK or Ffestiniog Travel. For domestic Italian trains they are cheaper again. German Rail UK are cheaper than Trainseurope or Ffestiniog Travel for domestic trains within Germany and Austria and may be competitive with them for international trips with a big proportion of miles in Germany.
In North America RailEurope offer cheapest costs where the ticketing system is adminstered by SNCF: France, Thalys trains, Eurostar, TGV's into Switzerland and Italy. For Germany, Switzerland, Austria and Eastern Europe, the ticket prices on RailEurope are often 50-80% over the prices taken by other agents. Also, RailEurope ignores many train routes (even important ones like the Brenner corridor from Munich via Innsbruck to Italy) and many local trains. Before you buy from RailEurope please check out the local rail companies so you know what prices other agents, and national rail systems, charge.
Budget Europe Travel Service, phone 800-441-9413 or 800-441-2387, site http://www.budgeteuropetravel.com/
Euraide of Florida, E-mail [email protected], phone
at the Florida office 941/480-1555, site http://www.euraide.com
Trains Europe of Cambridgeshire E-mail [email protected], phone 00 44 900 195 0101, site http://www.trainseurope.co.uk/ -
Ffestiniog Travel of Wales, E-mail [email protected], phone
00 44 176 651 2400, site http://www.festtravel.co.uk,
Inside France (Canterbury). E-mail [email protected], phone
00 44 122 745 0088, site www.rail-canterbury.co.uk/.
German Rail UK in Surbiton. E-mail: [email protected], phone
00 44 870 243 5363, site http://www.deutsche-bahn.co.uk,
Railwise Ltd in London. E-mail: [email protected], phone
00 44 207 242 1490, site http://railwise.com
Ben Haines, London
[email protected]
Nov 17th, 2006, 07:02 AM
#53
Join Date: Jun 2003
Posts: 3,652
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
What's the difference - free transit could reap huge benefits for society - especially if twinned with things like the Swiss freeway car tax - boosting gas tax, road tax, etc. forcing folks onto public transit - why - because the developed countries are hogging the world's resources and we really can't be wasting so much energy on private vehicle travel. Much like a country's defense, which the government must supply from tax funds, public transit is also a crucial thing to have and make it free and accessible for all - radical yes but that's what i believe. Or at least a means tested paying so the poorest can also afford to ride trains, etc. The free bicycles that have been tried in certain European cities are a start on this.
Nov 17th, 2006, 07:47 AM
#54
Join Date: Jan 2003
Posts: 74,699
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
Hi PB,
>public transit is also a crucial thing to have and make it free and accessible for all - radical yes but that's what i believe. <
Not so radical at all.
When I was a mere child, before the Defense Highway Act, we had reasonably good public transportation in all of our larger cities and in most of the smaller ones.
In addition, railroads were required to provide passenger service, even to small out-of-the-way towns.
By 1960, most city transportation was in the hands of private firms and the railroads were dropping passenger service.
By 1970, we created Amtrak because the railroads wouldn't carry passengers anymore.
Passenger service between Augusta and Atlanta was discontinued in 1967.
By 1980, city public transportation had become a joke and Amtrak's routes had been cut way back.
Public transportation in most of the US in nearly nonexistent outside the largest cities.
In Atlanta, it was recently proposed to spend $25,000,000,000 to expand and widen the highway network "in order to reduce congestion". Yeah, right.
Rail transit? Not even being considered.
As poorly functioning as the European rail systems might be today (compared to when?) they are far superior to what we have in the US.
>public transit is also a crucial thing to have and make it free and accessible for all - radical yes but that's what i believe. <
Not so radical at all.
When I was a mere child, before the Defense Highway Act, we had reasonably good public transportation in all of our larger cities and in most of the smaller ones.
In addition, railroads were required to provide passenger service, even to small out-of-the-way towns.
By 1960, most city transportation was in the hands of private firms and the railroads were dropping passenger service.
By 1970, we created Amtrak because the railroads wouldn't carry passengers anymore.
Passenger service between Augusta and Atlanta was discontinued in 1967.
By 1980, city public transportation had become a joke and Amtrak's routes had been cut way back.
Public transportation in most of the US in nearly nonexistent outside the largest cities.
In Atlanta, it was recently proposed to spend $25,000,000,000 to expand and widen the highway network "in order to reduce congestion". Yeah, right.
Rail transit? Not even being considered.
As poorly functioning as the European rail systems might be today (compared to when?) they are far superior to what we have in the US.
Nov 17th, 2006, 08:14 AM
#56
Join Date: Jun 2003
Posts: 3,652
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
About PREM's thru RailEurope - yes and no. During the last year RailEurope started offering discounted tickets on French trains and they now have a two-tiered price structure - but the cheaper fares often are not as cheap as the PREM's offered on www.voyages-sncf.com - that said occasionally RE's PREM's can be surprisingly cheap at times so just check www.raileurope.com and see what the price is and compare to sncf site. Once in a while RailEurope has specials, such as their current one offering TGV tickets at 50% off - in honor of the 25th anniversay of TGV service - but these tickets are few in number it seems so you'd have to book early to get one.
So the answer is yes but generally not as good as from sncf.com. Ironically Raileurope is largely owned by the sncf and could offer the same fares but overhead and staffing US offices requires surcharges - the US subsidiary, unlike sncf in France, must turn a profit - sncf in France routinely runs huge deficits without public approbation.
So the answer is yes but generally not as good as from sncf.com. Ironically Raileurope is largely owned by the sncf and could offer the same fares but overhead and staffing US offices requires surcharges - the US subsidiary, unlike sncf in France, must turn a profit - sncf in France routinely runs huge deficits without public approbation.
Nov 28th, 2006, 11:32 AM
#57
Join Date: Jun 2003
Posts: 3,652
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
An afterthought about making public transport free and benefits - you also eliminate the immense marketing costs and selling ticket costs - everyone just shows up and gets a seat - you have to have capacity at peak periods or if overloaded folks will adjust their journey times on their own.
Think of the savings in overhead cost - no ticket windows, no conductors, no internet maintenance, no paper wasted on tickets, etc. Plus immense benefits for society yet born!
Think of the savings in overhead cost - no ticket windows, no conductors, no internet maintenance, no paper wasted on tickets, etc. Plus immense benefits for society yet born!
Dec 11th, 2006, 09:31 AM
#58
Original Poster
Join Date: May 2006
Posts: 72
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
My final itinerary has changed quite drastically - it's now 4 nights in London, Paris, and Amsterdam, a flight to Copenhagen for 3 nights, a flight to Prague for 2 nights, overnight train to Krakow for 3 nights, overnight train to Vienna for 3 nights, train to Salzburg for 2 nights, and train to Zurich for the flight home. My family has Sheraton points so we've booked nice hotels in a couple of the cities for free (way to cut costs!) I've located trains and will book them either through SCNF or the European Rail 800 number. Thank you, everyone!
Dec 11th, 2006, 10:35 AM
#60
Join Date: Mar 2003
Posts: 22,995
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
Think of the savings in overhead cost - no ticket windows, no conductors, no internet maintenance, no paper wasted on tickets, etc. Plus immense benefits for society yet born!
I heard of this suggestion years ago for the Metro system, when they still had the ticket punchers at the entrance of the metro stations. But the question remains: what would you do with those who are currently employed under the present system?
I heard of this suggestion years ago for the Metro system, when they still had the ticket punchers at the entrance of the metro stations. But the question remains: what would you do with those who are currently employed under the present system?
