The urban agglomeration of Paris houses roughly one sixth (!) of the total population of France, and is roughly 6½ times as big as the next biggest agglomeration (Lyon).
The biggest agglomeration area in Germany in Germany (the Ruhr area, which in turn is itself somewhat spread out and rather polycentric even on the local level) on the other hand only accounts for slightly more than 1/15th of Germany's population, and going further down the list you won't find any such large size discrepancies as between Paris and the rest of France. (In France, Paris is the only agglomeration area with more than 2,000,000 inhabitants, whereas Germany has seven agglomeration areas of that size category, all spread out throughout the country.)
So in France it totally makes sense to just build a series of radial high speed lines all linking Paris with the provincial agglomerations, and even where one line might serve several cities along the way (like how going to Marseille you also pass through/next to Lyon), traffic to/from Paris will dominate, so you'll still get lots of non-stop Paris ↔ Province trains and only comparatively few trains making intermediate stops.
Germany on the other hand doesn't have such a dominant traffic generator and the existing agglomerations are dotted all around the country, so traffic is more spread out and it's more difficult to capture/speed up an appreciable fraction of that with just a few lines.
So if the incentive is military (and sadly the Ukrainian Russian war is a reminder that war can happen even not too far away from Germany) Germany has proved its worth in making a dense railway network, possibly more costly than the French one, but very effective once built.
This is absolutely insane to hear. Feels like the whole "German efficiency" trope is mostly a meme or it doesn't apply to government/national services and is in line with all the other negative things I heard about the infamous archaic German bureocracy in general.
I know even Ukrainian refugees were shocked at how archaic German paper based bureocracy was compared to their home country which moved to digital, as they expected Europe's richest country to have much more efficient bureocracy than Europe's poorest country. Boy were they in for a surprise.
And let's not talk about Germany's infamously abysmal infrastructure and service coverage for fiber and mobile internet that's well behind Eastern Europe.
Germany is much less centralised than France. 20% of the population is in Paris. Only 2% of Germans live in Berlin. It would be insanity to mindlessly copy the French model when the circumstances are so different.
Over 6 million people live in Berlin metro, in an 80 million country this is closer to 8%.
> there are a lot of people who actually use the stations between, say, Berlin and Cologne
Sure, and a stop in the middle would make sense on that length of route, or alternating at which intermediate place(s) it stops. But with a stupid rule like having to stop in whatever state you pass means that you have to build rails around to avoid hitting a corner where nobody lives anyway because you'd have to stop for absolutely no reason.
Let the trains make stops and rails be laid based on, like you say, demand. Not on arbitrary border lines.
There is no such rule in Germany.
> high-speed trains need to have at least one stop in every federal state they cross
For example the ICE from Hamburg to Berlin tomorrow at 14:35 goes directly, not stopping in Schleswig-Holstein, Mecklenburg-Vorpommern or Brandenburg.
Edit: ah I see you added an example. That settles it then, thanks!
That's the system working as intended, though. People like to laugh about small cities like Montabaur or Limburg getting ICE access but it turned out that the regions benefitted a lot from that access and after two slow years the demand for high speed train access in the region exploded.
> A big impediment is the federal structure of Germany, as high-speed trains need to have at least one stop in every federal state they cross for political reasons
English is more topic-loaded: We might say "for political reasons, every high speed train in Germany..." and so on. In fact if it made any sense for the reason trains cross states to be a political one, the "for political reasons" clause would attach to "cross", not "have", where I believe this is unambiguous in German.
"for political reasons" could have been regulation, also. It happens that it isn't. For that matter "need to" carries more of a sense of obligation than I feel is truly warranted.
That all said, it's valid English and I read it to mean as the author intended.
French side having a certain State-planning infra are much, much more spread and in shape.
This isn't an issues specific to Germany though but many EU countries have the same issues.
The end result is too much talking politics and too little improvement, which only benefits the bureocrats cashing their paychecks either way, and hurts the taxpayers who need the services now.
Example? I know Poland is doing something, but still is far from speed of ICEs. The country is a bit smaller though, and largest destination - Warsaw - is relatively in the centre so it helps.
For instance https://elib.dlr.de/121661/1/Railways%202018_E3.01_Pagenkopf... page 3 you have a map of rails with the fraction electrified or https://www.tellerreport.com/business/2021-07-21-infrastruct... and https://www.spiegel.de/international/germany/low-german-infr...
Broadband coverage is in a similar sorry state respect of similarly big countries in EU, and it's very expensive, electricity is probably the most expensive in the EU etc
Long-story short: Germany lack of a state-wide infrastructure development, being too concentrate in private profit of some big industries, that's works well for such industries but not work at all for the country at a whole.
I do not know how old is this issue, I do not know if was planted on purpose after WWII to lock their development capability, it might be: I know for Italy was done, with the complicity of vast local corruption "allied" have managed to break up the too quickly too powerful industrial complex born after WWII in most sectors successfully stop many nascent champions. But anyway that's what I've seen in Germany and the little I read about, perhaps someone else here know more and can contribute :-)
Yeah it's really false, Germany is painfully bureaucratic, ceremonial and slow and dysfunctional, compared to other leading western nations.
German engineering, and german manufacturing, are really what deserves to have good reputation.
The Germans voted on paper. -> There was an undisputed result.
For example, the Poles are much better at building apartments and transport infrastructure fast than anyone else on your list, including Germany.
Is it that they are 'much better' or the economy is in different stages? The housing market in Germany is much more expensive. It's much cheaper to build in Poland.
Germany already has a larger transport infrastructure. Example: Autobahn 13000 km in Germany vs. roughly 2000km in Poland.
Czech and Polish economies are fairly comparable, but Czech ability to build anything is in tatters. We are a NIMBY paradise, every modest block of flats takes a decade to approve. Our northern neighbours aren't, they build fast.
Its also not true. Local politians are pushing hard to get high speed rail stops, and there is political horse trading going on when building lines to get more local stops, but it doesn't necessarily translate into "one stop in each state" rule.
The problem with hsr is geographical (non centralized coubtry means u need a big network), bureaucratic (it takes decades to build big infra projects), pilticical (germany underinvests in hsr, conservatives want cars, many local greens despise big infra that destroys local meadows), inertia (germans lack vision and follow through, they mostly fiddle and optimize).
However, every 2 hours there is a train that stops at Wittenberge (population 8k) and Ludwiglust (population 12k). I assume this is one of those mandated/political routes, rather than economic routes.
It adds an extra 20-30min to the trip, which isn't so bad. But whenever I've taken this route, maybe 2-5 people get on or off.
Would it be better served by more normal IC (200kph) or RE (160kph) train rather than an ICE? I don't know.
One thing to consider is that these services may be historic as well. Removing them will burn a lot of good will, which may be expensive in the long run for an operator that is dependent on ongoing public support - even if day-to-day decisions are made independently with economic interests in mind. Compare he marginal cost of providing those stops. Also consider that while Hamburg-Berlin may have a lot of competition from other modes, the small towns may not. Also, most ppl in those small cities will be close to the rail station. Add to that that ppl from surrounding regions will use the stops to get … basically anywhere by train, and you have a bunch of factors that my result in higher ridership than u would expect just by looking at the population of the cities themselves.
That's a Milchmädchenrechnung if I've ever seen one. When a long-distance train coming from Berlin stops in Ludwigslust, there is nearly always a guaranteed connection to a local train continuing towards Schwerin and Wismar (combined population 137k). I'm regularly using this route to visit my parents in Mecklenburg, and it's never just me who's changing trains in Ludwigslust. There's always at least two dozen people. On the weekends, sometimes a lot more.
In a similar vein, Wittenberge may not have all that much people living directly there, but it is an important train hub for northern Sachsen-Anhalt and Brandenburg with several RE lines all meeting there.
Ukraine isn't the poorest European country, Moldova is. (Well without counting the war, and i don't think we can accurately estimate it's economic damage).
As for the bureaucracy, it's actually quite easy to understand once you think about it. It's the same reason why Estonia was a frontrunner in eGovernement and eIDs - when regime change happens ( communism is replaced by a democracy-ish), lots of existing things (laws, institutions) are "tainted" with the aura of the old bad regime. So there's lots of impetus, desire and excuse to change all sorts of things. On the other hand, in a country Germany, even with the absorption of East Germany, things have worked, there's momentum, so there's not that much desire to just change everything.
I'd say it's actually much worse in the US in terms of the government's ability to get anything done related to infrastructure. Bad roads, rolling blackouts are a regular thing, etc. And of course there is the complete lack of any form of high speed rail connections anywhere in the US. Apparently it's impossible to get anything done on that front for decades now.
The ICE trains connect larger cities & regions, not just the big ones. There are ICE Sprinter trains with fewer stops, though. The ICE trains often don't have their own tracks, which is what makes them slow.
Think of German train infrastructure as a mesh, compared to a more star like system in France with Paris (14 Million people for the metropolitan area) as its center. Berlin is not the center of Germany and has only around 6 Million people in its metropolitan area.
(Also, Fyra? That's a hell of a throwback :P)
I thought Tijdreiziger would appreciate that!
That's not generally true. For example, the ICE train from Hamburg to Berlin goes through 3 other states (Schleswig-Holstein, Mecklenburg-Vorpommern and Brandenburg) without stops.
There may be local politicians in some states making such demands ("If you want to build your tracks through _my_ state, ..."), but I would assume they are trying to make an impression in an election campaign or something.
Edit: It turns out this EuroCity (line 27) is the only long-distance line that stops between Hamburg and Berlin. Lines 18, 28 and 29 go non-stop, as per https://assets.static-bahn.de/dam/jcr:b4fca34a-4b95-4d82-98d...
This is not correct. The Frankfurt-Berlin Sprinter, for example, is nonstop.
It takes about 3h 50-55min. Connections with 6 to 8 additional stops take not much long, though: around 15 to 20 min. more. Less than 3 min. more per stop.
The biggest problem with trains is Germany, in my opinion, is not speed, but the unreliability of the connections.
However, regarding the high-speed connection Munich-Berlin, the question was not so much whether to got through the Thüringer Wald (via Efurt), as the alternative would have meant to cross the Thüringer Schiefergebierge to the east (via Leipzig–Probstzella–Hochstadt-Marktzeuln), but whether building the line is worth the high costs at all.
There are quite a lot of "Inter City" railway stations in Germany.[1] This reflects the situation that Germany has not many large cities (only four have more than 1 mil. inhabitants), but a lot of medium sized ones (80 of over 100,000 inhabitants). Sometimes there are "Inter City" stops at small towns with important companies, such as Walldorf, where SAP is located. So the focus is not on connecting distant cities, but on train rides in the 50 to 150 km range. (Long distance commuting averages around 100 km.)
[1] The German Wikipedia has a list: https://de.wikipedia.org/wiki/Liste_der_Bahnh%C3%B6fe_mit_Ha...
The article mentions the Berlin - Paris will only stop in Frankfurt.