It is. I can accept train journeys (like, say, London to Rome or Stockholm to Barcelona) taking longer than flying, and would be happy with that in many cases (you can do things on a train, after all). Though when they take longer, are comprised of six discrete journeys which either fall apart if one train is delayed (and if Germany is in the path, this is likely) or require defensively allocating hours for waiting at provincial stations just in case, and cost several times the cost of flying, catching a sequence of trains out of principle feels like wearing a hair shirt.
What should be done: scrap the post-WW2 tax exemption for aviation fuel and use the funds to improve long-distance rail connections.
The answer would be high speed night trains. London - Rome takes a bit over 15h by train today. However that includes waiting for connections and a lot of stops on stations. So a direct train would be siginificantly faster probably more like 12-13h. That would mean you could go into a train station in London at 20:00 and end up in Rome at 8:00 for example.
Stockholm - Barcelona is a much longer journey. 2250km instead of 1400km for Rome - London. So a very long nigh train or a connection in Hamburg or Paris. with a night train going from there to Barcelona or Stockholm respectivly.
as much as I love trains (I’m on one while typing this) I can’t get myself to spend 170€ for a 21 hour train, even if part of it is spent sleeping, when a 2 hour flight could do the same for 50€.
I don’t know if it’s just cheaper or if there’s massive subsidies like other comments were saying, but for now it’s highly unpractical and uneconomical
(Explanation, for those not familiar with politics: the liberal party in Germany is infamous for blocking progressive economical legislation reasoning it would impede freedoms. For example they blocked a ban in advertising food containing high amounts of sugar, claimingit would impede parents’ freedom to buy candy for kids (it wouldn’t).)
It is. I can accept train journeys (like, say, London to Rome or Stockholm to Barcelona) taking longer than flying, and would be happy with that in many cases (you can do things on a train, after all). Though when they take longer, are comprised of six discrete journeys which either fall apart if one train is delayed (and if Germany is in the path, this is likely) or require defensively allocating hours for waiting at provincial stations just in case, and cost several times the cost of flying, catching a sequence of trains out of principle feels like wearing a hair shirt.
What should be done: scrap the post-WW2 tax exemption for aviation fuel and use the funds to improve long-distance rail connections.
The answer would be high speed night trains. London - Rome takes a bit over 15h by train today. However that includes waiting for connections and a lot of stops on stations. So a direct train would be siginificantly faster probably more like 12-13h. That would mean you could go into a train station in London at 20:00 and end up in Rome at 8:00 for example.
Stockholm - Barcelona is a much longer journey. 2250km instead of 1400km for Rome - London. So a very long nigh train or a connection in Hamburg or Paris. with a night train going from there to Barcelona or Stockholm respectivly.
as much as I love trains (I’m on one while typing this) I can’t get myself to spend 170€ for a 21 hour train, even if part of it is spent sleeping, when a 2 hour flight could do the same for 50€.
I don’t know if it’s just cheaper or if there’s massive subsidies like other comments were saying, but for now it’s highly unpractical and uneconomical
Sat is not friedomm. Greeting, your FDP.
(Explanation, for those not familiar with politics: the liberal party in Germany is infamous for blocking progressive economical legislation reasoning it would impede freedoms. For example they blocked a ban in advertising food containing high amounts of sugar, claimingit would impede parents’ freedom to buy candy for kids (it wouldn’t).)