Hacker Read top | best | new | newcomments | leaders | about | bookmarklet login

And usually freight doesn't complain. Much unlike the self-loading variaty, aka passengers.


sort by: page size:

Passenger traffic in general is a tiny fraction of freight. Freight drives the conversation.

Most cargo is going long distances that passengers should fly for. The needs of freight and passengers is different enough that they should almost never be on the same track.

When humans are on a train speed counts and they are willing to pay extra for it. When freight is on a train they can save money by going slower.


yeah I don't think any freight is being moved by (checks article) passenger cars

Freight doesn’t have priority, passenger trains have priority according to the law but the law is functionally unenforceable so freight steals priority from passengers.

It is a standard feature for many factories, but usually for transporting cargo, not passengers/commuters.

Also, the whole scheduling of cargo trains has big dollar penalties for delays in loading, unloading, and not arriving on time. Its amazing how detailed folks get about trains showing up. Cargo rail has a lot of moving parts that need to coordinate to keep the goods flowing.

SBB cargo is by law supposed to be self sustaining[1] and operate like a regular business unlike passenger rail.

[1] https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=t2DNK2lrSKA


Typically everyone does both freight and passengers, but it'll be better at one or the other. Passengers want fast trains with few delays that get close to population centers. Freight doesn't care about speed as much but cares about the overall throughput and wants to end up in distribution centers.

They do for commodities, which transportation in this case generally is.

The penalties on cargo timing are pretty severe. If that cargo train is supposed to be somewhere to load / unload, it really is a problem if it doesn't arrive on time and costs the railroads money they do not want to pay. Cargo, as many SV startups have discovered, is much more profitable than passenger.

How many stowaways still travel via freight trains in the US?

I also don't see any real comparison of freight and public transit via rail other than they are both trains...


Yep, freight has right of way.

Thing is, freight trains are a far better use of the track than passenger trains: the system is ideal for slow-moving bulk cargo that doesn't care if it has to sit on a siding for a week, not to mention that it's a much less damaging way of moving heavy material around than trucks. Passengers, meanwhile, want to go specific places at specific times, and that just does not coexist well with freight. Better for passengers to travel by air, private car, dedicated high-speed rail, and other systems focused on the job.

The same logic applies to railways, airports, cargo ships.

But it's focused squarely in freight, not passengers.

https://inlandrail.artc.com.au/


Moving freight by train is also a lot more efficient than moving people by train. Freight doesn't need room to walk around, doesn't need to eat, doesn't need to sleep, doesn't need bathrooms.

Yes, but that should not matter on lines where passenger traffic is not mixed with freight one.

That’s the problem. What’s good for freight is bad for passengers and good passenger lines are horrible for freight. Even the model is different (B2B versus B2C). The mixing is a big problem and any disruption in the current network would affect a lot of people. The private freight carriers are doing a fine job.

And where does the freight in a big city come from? It doesn't just teleport in.

Freight trains are probably the least bad way for freight to enter a city, given their efficiency and relative greenness. But they do need to be unloaded, maintained, and turned around somewhere, and wherever that is going to happen is going to be noisy.

next

Legal | privacy