I'm a big train fan and do impractical train rides quite often. I dont think millions of people share our appreciation of trains. Most people use whatever is faster, or cheaper. Trains over 3 hours tend to be neither. Paris to Flensburg is both slow and expensive. By most people's standards, the 6h additional duration of the trip offsets the airport annoyance by far.
> love trains -- but planes are usually a better solution than high-speed trains.
Not for short to medium distances they're not. Everything under 3-4 hours of train is faster, more comfortable and with much less hassle than flying (going to an airport, security checks, uncomfortable seating, interruptions for take off and landing, long queueing).
Even more than 5 hours - I've taken the Paris to Milan and Paris to Barcelona trains multiple times (6:30-7h), and both are relatively frequent, quite full, and competitive with air travel due to a number of factors even if they're slightly slower (for Paris-Milan depending on departure point and airport on both ends, you're looking at 30-60 mins per direction, plus being 2 hours early at the airport, plus the time to get from the gate to the train station to get out of the airport, plus 1h30 flight and you're looking at 5-6h for the plane vs 7h for the train):
* vastly more comfortable, with more space and amenities
* nice views
* single style of hassle (get to the train, sit down, enjoy; with a plane you get to the terminal, pass through security, then wait, then go in a plane in heavily restricted mode, then you can move/do stuff after take-off, then again you go in restricted mode, then you wait for taxi to finish, then you get to the gate, then you walk towards the exits, wait for luggage, etc.)
I'd say 5 hours is about the limit where the train makes more sense practically than flying. An eight hour train isn't worth it IMO compared to a 1.5 hour flight.
I took the train from Berlin to Paris in 2018. Was visiting Europe from the US with my son and we did it on a Sunday when nothing was open anyway. No problem with 7 hours on a train. Would have taken at least 5 hours to fly, getting to/from the airports, security, arriving early, etc. Cheaper and more enjoyable to take the train,
Maybe you would. We know from other countries that in general 5 hours is about the max time people will spend on a train before they choose to fly instead.
Because of air resistance planes are more fuel efficient as well for those longer trips (don't forget about energy lost to brakes when the train needs to stop)
We generally don't, most of the passengers on these trains only go part of the route. Train trips taking 2-3 days (like Moscow to Urals) used to be more common, but flying has become cheaper years ago.
> Of course, the train trip will be longer so, tradeoffs.
If you count everything in, a high speed train is faster or close enough (but compensating with much higher levels of comfort and most of the time being spent in the train itself, not separated in travel to airport, queuing there, wasting time there, boarding, flying, disembarking, waiting for luggage, travel from airport) with air travel less than 3 hours.
I really wonder who takes the plane when a train does it in under 2.5 hours... It feels very, very hard to be faster than 2.5 hours with a plane to go pretty much anywhere (including going to the airport, check-in, security check, boarding, flight, and going to the city from the destination airport).
So yeah, 2.5 hours seems ridiculous. 4h made much more sense, because many people consider that a 4h journey in the train is "very long" and won't do it. Spoiler: it is actually really fine, and it would have been good to force people to realize it.
A large part of the comfort factor is that a direct train takes me from city center to city center, while a "direct" flight requires me to first get to the airport, then navigate the airport, then get from the destination airport to the city. That not only easily adds at least 2 hours to the trip (30 min x 2 spent getting to/from the airport, 30 minutes to get through the airport/security in the best case, 30 minutes to be there at the boarding time), you also spend at least half of the time actively having to do something.
A 4 hour train vs. a 1 hour flight? The flight shaves off one hour of wall-clock time at best, at the cost of being a lot more hassle. But you don't think about this when booking, nor about the luggage surcharge etc. You see "4:00" vs. "1:07" and "$99" vs. "$29".
I regularly take a train that takes 6.5 hours. The flight would be 45 minutes.
Getting to, into and away from the airport easily ads another 2 hours tho. Also this route has 3 flights a week compared to a train every 2 hours.
With the train I just get in and enjoy nice service, free power and WiFi and usually get some work done.
Not to mention the difference in my ecological footprint.
My point is that it's not like you are wasting time in a uncomfortable environment usually. So I dont mind taking the train, actually usually even prefer it, so do millions of people all over the world.
well, people in Russia do take long train rides like even from Moscow to Vladivostok - 7 days - instead of air. And 2-3 days train rides are nothing exceptional. When you have more time than money...
To be fair that's not really a reasonable train trip for people that want to actually get there as opposed to riding a train. Probably above 9 hours compared to a sub-2h flight. Train routes that are more meaningful tend to be better serviced.
~5h is how long a train takes from Warsaw to Berlin, compared to ~1h by plane (~2-3h including getting to and from airport), and I know multiple people who still prefer the train - even when they are able to easily afford any mode of transportation.
With the train, you have way more freedom in choosing the time and the hour. You have multiple trains leaving during the day, and you can choose 30 min before needing to hop onto one. Also, if you miss one, you just wait for the next one.
Also, on the train you can work, relax and stretch your legs or eat freely. So it doesn't feel like lost time really. Planes often do, even if you travel business.
I flew from Moscow to Vladivastok recently, and it's a choice between 8 hour flight and a week in a train. The planes might be missing some maintenance, but they are certainly not falling out of the skies, and it's not like the trains can't fail (especially considering occasional train tracks sabotages). There are always risks, it's not that big of a deal.
Not everyone can work in a train because not every job is suitable for that. If all you want is to get from point A to point B and you are not paid for that, the extra time is a burden.
Another con is this scenario: you need to go from Berlin to Paris for an activity that takes 2-3 hours (ex: paperwork that requires your presence on site or a very important meeting). With a plane you fly in, do the thing and fly out same day. With the train, you spend 2 days. I had to do this a lot 20 years ago between Bucharest, Romania, and Sofia, Bulgaria; about 370km, no highway, inconvenient flight times, train took ~ 6 hours each direction etc. I was driving there and back, 4 hours door to door each direction, the gas was a lot cheaper than the hotel and sometimes traveling 2-5 people in a car. Double the distance and the plane is the attractive option vs train.
Well, here's an example. The route between Moscow and St. Petersburg (about 400 miles, about the same as LA to SF) is a very popular train route. Flying between these cities makes no sense because a high speed train between them takes 4 hours and you board and get off right in the middle of each city. If you were flying you'd need to get to the airport, pass through security, fly, collect baggage, get to the destination city. So train ends up being faster, cheaper and much much more comfortable.
People easily tolerate 3h on a plane, and trains are much more comfortable than planes (more space, free to roam).
And you don't have to get to airport, get from airport, check in, wait for baggage.
I would say 5 hours should be non-issue.
"As a rail enthusiast I would love to see trains to Berlin or Milan or even Moscow. But realistically that is many years away."
Remember there's already a direct train connection between Moscow and Paris.
Most people choose to fly these days, of course.
reply