Austria rail operator OeBB unveils new night trains | Hacker News Reader

Austria rail operator OeBB unveils new night trains

techxplore.com

261 pointsPaulHoule260 comments

I have taken the car train from Hamburg to Vienna as a family. Pure luxury and comfort! We drive from Denmark to Hamburg(with a 2 year old), and load the fully packed car(stroller, luggages gifts for the in-laws etc) into the train at a special entrance, and walk into the coaches. We booked a private cabin/room for more privacy and also because we have a two year old. There were quite comfortable bunk booths as well in the same train.

Sleep comfortably through the night. The train movements are soothing after a while.

In the morning a serviceman in the train wakes us up with coffee and warm breakfast.

Before Noon, we were driving off at Vienna towards our destination- Salzburg.

I wish this facility existed everywhere - any major city to another major city across Europe. Imagine how many cars it would take off the road!

I really wish the European Union does more than what it already does to unify the train systems and invest heavily in passenger focussed train tracks all across Europe. Make us not want to drive!

No hours long security checks and walking in the airport. Comfortable train booths, save on hotel room costs by traveling overnight, bring a lot of luggage with you if you wish… what is not to like?! And by the way pollute less and not doom our planet.

Something like this would cost $1000 in Australia

We have it - closer to $5000. https://aussietrains.com.au/the-ghan

Trust me this is not the cross continent train that you have in Australia, this is a dumpy Euro train and Austria is a dirty old hole.

Tell me you've never been on an railjet without telling me...

This, like many other ideas combining cars and public transport, sounds like something that doesn't scale. The exact numbers vary, but the passenger capacity of a car train is usually something like 1/2 of a normal night train or 1/3 of a normal day train, assuming that the train is fully dedicated to carrying people with cars. You also need special facilities and longer stops, because cars can't just dismount at normal platforms in a couple of minutes. On popular routes, this all means that you take more cars off the road by not carrying cars on the train.

This implies that rail is running at capacity during the night, which I suspect isn’t true.

It’s not a choice between 1 car-train or 1 normal night train - you can have both if there is line capacity.

And you probably aren’t running sleeper carriages during peak hours.

> This implies that rail is running at capacity during the night, which I suspect isn’t true.

cry-laughs in German Oh hell yes we do run at nominal capacity, actually often enough above. The transit routes are fully booked all times of the year, the demand for freight transit is insane, and every bordering country is complaining that we can't get our shit together (to no one's surprise after 30 years of perpetual budget cuts).

The problem is: virtually all trans-European routes run through Germany. You can't avoid running through here.

That's like a lot of half knowledge someone would get by just listening to the media and anecdotal evidence. The net is not at capacity especially not at night. The freight trains that run at night have peak network capacity of only 30% even on high traffic routes like Hamburg - Berlin. There are close to no passenger cars running at night. At least inform yourself before writing a comment in the tonal voice you did.

Many German lines are running at 125% of capacity and above, including at night.

I do feel like rail in general isn't running anywhere near capacity. If it was optimized better with modern fluid signaling system, "packet based" routing of individual carriages, and way shorter headways, I think 10x the amount of cargo could be squeezed through.

And yet car+sleeper trains were pretty common until relatively recently! (edit: in Europe)

The specialized stops are an issue (and have gotten very rare), but the speed limit from the car train is an issue but especially the highly cyclical nature of the demand for car transport on night trains, much more so than normal sleeper trains. Most of the rolling stock used for transporting cars is very old and not getting replaced (because you can't recoup the cost), while there have been quite a few orders for new sleeper trains.

People mostly won't take their cars. Some will, but it will be much cheaper to hire cars at both ends.

The future of personal transport is not IMO private personal cars, but this will help the transition

> I wish this facility existed everywhere - any major city to another major city across Europe. Imagine how many cars it would take off the road!

>> You also need special facilities and longer stops, because cars can't just dismount at normal platforms in a couple of minutes.

So what? Point-to-point with no stops in between. Works for the chunnel, too.

I love night trains. I’ve taken them from Warsaw to Prague, Prague to Zurich, and Verona to Paris. It’s by far my preferred option - you get a decent nights sleep and whilst the tickets are more expensive it’s one fewer nights in a hotel which normally offsets it. I still really want to do the two in the UK, the Caledonian Sleeper and the Night Riviera.

You pay extra to sleep 10 hours on a train versus 2 hours by plane at half the cost?

It depends on what you want to accomplish. For a business trip it’s not amazing, but when you go with kids on vacation the night train is quite appealing in comparison with a flight.

Add an hour commute to the airport, another hour at check-in and security and 10x the emissions: it's actually a fun experience going by night train, especially when traveling with kids.

Per passenger mpg between a train and a plane isn't all that far off. Planes tend to travel pretty full so per passenger mpg is pretty high, like 100mpg. You get better per passenger mpg with a train but the train needs to get decent ridership. Depending on where you are going, maybe the train and bus service doesn't get too much ridership and your flight in might actually work out to be the greenest way.

A key advantage of trains is they can be fully electric and don’t need to carry their entire fuel load on board.

An electrified train running on nuclear or wind supplied power basically can’t be beat for low-environmental-impact long distance travel. And even for non-electric trains, diesel trains with a mere 23 people per car have a BTU per passenger mile of 2,000, compared to a typical 30mpg car’s 4,000 BTU per mile.

And even if it’s not yet electric, buying the right of way and building the rail lines is better preparation for that future all-electric world. Plus the more trains exist, the more full they’ll typically be, and the better we’ll get at making them more efficient.

Radiative forcing-wise, flying emits 200g equivalent of co2 per pax-km, rail about 20g. And that’s largely due to infrastructure, so the marginal „cost“ of more trains is low.

The marginal cost of more trains being low depends on there being infrastructure at all, and some countries and areas are much better built out for this than others. For example, whats the marginal cost of another high speed train from Tokyo to Osaka? Probably low, the high speed tracks are already there and there is probably ample platform capacity at either end. Move east to Califnornia and whats the cost of adding another high speed train from SF to LA where there wasn't one previously? We are looking at north of 100 billion dollars here for this link and years of work. Quite a mountain of money, time, and effort, compared to e.g. scheduling another plane to land even at a tiny airport in an impoverished country.

You need to factor in the cost of a hotel as well, since you don't need to pay for an extra night if you take the sleeper train

Two hours by plane usually ends up as four and a half in total when you factor in time at the airport, plus you can turn up at your destination first thing in the morning feeling refreshed rather than tired from travelling. Then once you factor in the stress, noise, environmental impact and delays that come with flying, the night train becomes a really attractive option.

Not to mention time traveling to and from the airpot. The Hauptbahnhof is usually right downtown.

What you said is already factored fully in GP’s comment. :-) sorry.

On a plane, you may have to get up extra early, or still lose half a day. Especially in Central/Eastern Europe, the prices aren't that high really. And, as GP already wrote, you save on one night in a hotel, which may offset the entire difference.

Also, there is the environment. If that were factored in properly in the prices (and that's being worked on), the train would be a lot cheaper.

I don't think you can really consider the environment here as there are too many variables to consider in a reliable model. E.g. its not clear that replacing that entire planes worth of peoples trips with another routing would even net a gain, if people might have to do more circuitous routing that take more time and distance, or take different modes of transit that aren't a fully electrified rail that goes end to end, e.g. a lightly filled bus that has a much lower per passenger mpg than an airplane.

I understand that some comparisons with realistic assumptions have been made. Notably, high-speed trains cause significantly more emissions than classical trains, but are still better than planes.

Are high sped trains worth the extra capital and operating expense?

I love trains.

https://www.youtube.com/shorts/Gmr_BXqDPEY

Honestly given the difference in environmental impact idk why it matters. Flying is simply nit sustainable and should generally simply not be an option.

Just to be clear it currently is commonly the only option, but that must change

I took a night train from Prague to different locations many times, but I cannot sleep well there. The incessant shaking of the carriage wakes me up, half of the journey my head is lower than my legs, and loud station announcements during stops don't help either.

I envy anyone who can catch more than 2-3 hours of sleep on a night train.

Took Lisbon to Donostia-San Sebastián before Renfe canceled it in 2020. Basic hostel-like sleeping experience, but really nice and something that should exist.

Would love to take these more often if there were more (any) west to central Europe connections! (perfect routes for it too, since the flights are long and the infrastructure is less high speed)

A car+sleep train would be amazing to bring back, too.

I travelled from Germany to Croatia and had to book a 2 person sleeping cabin (100€ more expensive). When we entered, the sleeping wagon was a seating wagon. We (2) were stuffed with 2 other people into a cabin. No one told us what was going on. Well we travelled for 13h without getting any sleep.

I created a support ticket on the same day from inside the train. Only generic response. 2 weeks later I created another one. Same deal. About a week ago I contacted the arbitration board and the ÖBB refunded 100% of the ticket purchase price. I didn't except that.

This is really exemplary.

I'm guessing they receive a high volume of support requests and are understaffed.

The reason why we there was no sleeping wagon was apparently that it went defective.

I'm guessing the wagons are old and the cabins are small and it's about time they got replaced. Also this year the sheer volume of travelers was absurd. All the seating cabins were fully booked for over a month in advance. All that were was left were a few sleeping cabins every few days. That's why we booked them. But we couldn't book a 3 people cabin for 200€, (2 seats would've been 120€), because 1 male traveler booked 1 bed in it. So we had to book a 300€ 2 bed cabin.

Well I'm looking forward for the new wagons.

> I'm guessing they receive a high volume of support requests and are understaffed.

No, the reason is that there's no penalty for the behavior you just witnessed, so it's more profitable to stonewall victims in hopes they go away, and only refund when the authority actually forces them to, which only happens in a small percentage of cases where the fraud victim actually escalates their complaint to the relevant authority.

Imagine if shoplifting by the common man was treated the same way - you can shoplift all you want and the worst-case scenario is that you'll have to give the goods back if the police actually catches you.

That's what I thought too, but I'm giving them the benefit of the doubt. If that was organized, that would be quite the scandal.

It's organized by incompetence, so that they have plausible deniability. Just that none of that incompetence ever gets addressed like it would if it was around their profit center for example.

Airlines do the same when it comes to compensation claims.

That is how shoplifting works. Except the police will never catch you.

But when they do catch you it generally results in consequences beyond giving the stolen goods back.

TLDR: don’t shoplift, instead make a company and defraud consumers. It’s more profitable and less risky at the same time!

Majority of shoplifters that are caught (a tiny number) have nothing more than maybe giving the goods back.

Same with bike thefts.

You do at the very least end up with a criminal record which might hurt future job prospects and increases the sentence if you're caught again.

I've been taking the ÖBB night trains (Nightjet) a lot the last couple of years. It's a fantastic way to travel, I really hope the network will expand.

My only recommendation is not to take one if you absolutely must arrive at the stated time in the morning. They are commonly delayed by multiple hours. So far this has not been a problem for me because the stated arrival times are really early morning. But worth being aware of.

My experience was the same traveling Europe by rail. It's such a lovely idea, I just wish they were more financially competitive.

Most trains did arrive a few hours late in the end. I remember on one train from Prague to Cologne, the train had to sit outside a station for multiple hours while two passengers argued outside(?) and the train staff waited for police at ~midnight.

My experience riding trains in Europe as a European is that everything is great when you're traveling domestically (bar the usual complaints from any commuter that exist but differ between any mode of transport) but once you take a train that crosses a border things really fall apart. Especially when it's not some commuter line.

That's one thing I wish the EU really did better - do more to integrate and de-federate the rail systems. There should be no major difference riding the rails in any state. Of course, this is a lofty goal since even within countries usually commuter transport is run by local companies and not even nationally interoperable.

There is the TEN-T plan, which attempts to integrate all transport modalities across the EU https://transport.ec.europa.eu/transport-themes/infrastructu...

That’s an infrastructure plan, not operations.

Trains within Germany (Deutsche Bahn) are also simply a shitshow. One can get the feeling that they kind of ruin it for the neighbouring countries as well.

I avoid the EC trains here in Switzerland that are coming from Germany exactly for that reason: late, crowded, broken. They just suck. The return trip when leaving from CH going to DE is usually ok (at least for the commuter part that I need them for)

I was living in Germany in 1999 and rode night trains all over Europe. Even then I was amazed at how much better the air travel experience was in Europe compared to the U.S. (much more competitive) and it seemed the Europeans I knew were more inclined to fly than I was, since taking the train is a novelty to an American.

High-speed rail became dominant in the next decade and I think it was the cynical kind of of ‘competition’ that if there is an affordable option and an astronomically expensive option (HSR is often 2x or 3x the cost of flying) why should the provider offer the affordable one? (It’s like how a car dealer has no M or L cars but they have rows and rows of unsold XL, XXL, and XXXL SUVs)

The EU is trying to do to rail travel what the U.S. (and the EU) did for plane travel by deregulating it, breaking down monopolies so the private sector could enter and drive down prices.

They passed a bunch of rules requiring the separation of the track ownership from the train ownership which means any private company can come in, lease some track time, lease some trains, and become a train operator overnight.

Similar rule changes have led to tremendous improvements in Italy for example, which had the unfortunate (?) side effect of bankrupting the national plane carrier Alitalia (not sure if it’s really unfortunate considering it was heavily subsidized by the govt, much like plane travel throughout the world, where govts inevitably subsidize plane travel by bailing out plane companies on a regular basis, and even the companies that don’t need bailing out benefit because they share costs with highly unprofitable companies essentially running on govt bailouts).

> I just wish they were more financially competitive.

I'm doing Paris <=> Wien, and it was financially competitive to airplanes. 100€/person/way (ok cheapest seat rate, that's probably very uncomfortable... I'll see) I had 240€/person/2 way with airplanes. I just checked airplane prices again and that's still pretty much the same prices (a bit lower than train if you accept going to the FarAwayAirport, much higher if you take the Airport on a train/subway station)

It does take a lot more time because it's one train every 2 day and arrives a bit late to do train => home => workplace, so if you value being where you want to be when you want to be, you could probably say that airplanes is more competitive)

I usually compare those to flights that arrive conveniently early for business travelers and cheaper, less business-friendly flights combined with a hotel night; night trains usually win when there’s a convenient option.

Cattle class was decently comfortable on every train I was on, and combined with the far lower (almost pleasant) noise of trains vs. aircraft engines, it was a far nicer experience overall.

Though supposedly theft is a greater issue on night trains than flights, so I was apprehensive to sleep..

Also no security and you. An arrive 5-10 before departure vs 1-4 hours depending on the airport and time (and just not dealing with security period)

Be careful with arriving just on time. We were refused boarding the Thalys once because on the station attendants watch it was 4 minutes to the time instead of 5. So we were refused on the platform even though the conductor of the train a few meters off was urging us to come and hurry.

(It was also the last train of the day that would get us to our destination. Ultimately we got a nice story out of it. But it still smarts.)

Recently took the Nightjet from Stuttgart to Bled (Slovenia). The outbound service must have been reconfigured as we had booked a private berth, but were assigned a couchette with a stranger supposedly joining my partner and I at Munich. Kinda made it difficult to get to sleep, but this person never materialised. The attendant was very friendly and helpful. They did mention to keep the doors locked overnight.

During the return journey we got our private berth, but had a rather lengthy delay at Salzburg waiting for several other services (from Venice etc) to join ours, then had to stop again just over the border for the Polizei to inspect our passports at 5AM – started to get a little anxious that we were going to miss our connection and the whole house of cards was going to come down.

Similar to others, I was woken at Salzburg by shouts of people on the platform. I heard whistles as I presume the authorities dealt with folks boarding on the train who weren't supposed to…

That said, overall a good experience, and would happily use the service again.

If your train has more than 2 hours delay at your destination you can get a 50% refund. If you don't care whether you arrive on time in the morning this can be a good way to save some money. https://www.oebb.at/de/reiseplanung-services/nach-ihrer-reis...

The ÖBB night trains can be awesome, but the quality doesn't seem to be consistent enough yet. There were reports of over 10% of all night trains getting cancelled this summer and replaced with regular trains (with seats, no beds).

Some statistics (German, use translate in browser): https://www.derstandard.at/story/3000000182197/sitzen-statt-...

The trouble lies in the old rolling stock. They bought all that from Deutsche Bahn who suddenly stopped all sleeper train services a few years ago. Deutsche Bahn had neglected that segment for years and did not invest into more than the bare maintenance to keep the stock rolling.

Because it's unprofitable. We need to either accept that we need to subsidise these kind of services for climate protection or ban flights inside the European Union

Rather, the answer (as always) is carbon tax.

So, a big fat scam. No thanks.

Better than government banning flights all up.

>> carbon tax

> big fat scam

Care to elaborate?

If it's going to be anything like the carbon offsets, I see zero reason to elaborate since it will inevitably end up looking like arguing with religious people.

I am all for taxing pollution but focusing on carbon alone makes me extremely dubious of the actual intent behind such proposals.

These things appear to be weapons disguised as legitimate efforts to improve things.

So instead of taking the opportunity to educate somebody on a topic you're implying you know a lot about, you've decided it's not worth the bother because I'm probably religious about -- checks notes -- carbon taxes... and there's going to be no reasoning with me?

Why bother commenting on the internet at all?

So, instead of arguing your own thoughts on the matter, you choose to downvote when I share my own. Or, you could just do the usual citations spam to silence any dissenting opinions.

Why bother indeed.

I don't have 500 rep. I'm unable to downvote. I tried to engage in discourse by asking you to elaborate on your position -- the onus wasn't on me to explain anything. Good luck in life.

I did explain but apparently my reasoning wasn't good enough. It's hard to take someone seriously when they are in favour of scams like carbon tax, considering the premise of carbon offsets. It's akin to paying someone to take the punishment for a crime you did.

Take care.

Hey Siri, how do I deal with an economic externality?

Didn't work in Canada.

Canada's current carbon tax is at 65 CAD per ton of CO2, working out to roughly 15 cents per liter (typical gas price right now is 1.75ish per liter).

The degree of tax is just too small right now to realistically expect major impact on behavior.

We'll see what happens as tax continues to ramp.

The big issue I think with the tax is that its ultimately paid for by consumers and not capital, as a result behavior won't shift, people will just get poorer in need of more subsidy and wealth will be more concentrated. Rather than a carbon tax, we should tax wealth for carbon used to generate such wealth in the American economic system. We could do this by taxing the holdings directly, or having a progressive tax rate that is effectively zero for the sort of purchases a middle class individual will make in their life, and quite steep for the sort of purchases that are more common among the elite with substantially larger carbon footprints.

In theory a carbon tax incentivises low carbon solutions. In theory the market is frictionless and transparent.

Theory will only take you so far

Is jet fuel taxed? That would be against some international treaties, so I doubt they do that.

But the rate can't be flat. Some types of carbon emissions are more important than others. That has to be taken into account, otherwise carbon tax will never be feasible morally or politically.

Eh… that’s an invitation for lobbyists and politicians to buggar the whole thing up for every self-serving interest imaginable. The simpler the better.

Flat rate just won't work, ever, it's a doomed idea. We need political decision about what kind of emissions are acceptable and what kinds are not.

No way basic necessities, food, transportation should be taxed the same rate as luxury houses and yachts/private jets.

It's not realistic.

This is why the game is really screwed up. To make these decisions when coming up with carbon credits, or any other decisions regarding resources in a market, policy makers have to defer to industry because they simply don't understand industry and will never have the time to fully understand it like a domain expert would. Now, its not necessarily that the industry's own scientists and experts are corrupt, but that the business models naturally disincentivize hard truths if they come at a cost to profit. Shareholders don't want to hear that their investment is being taxed above others in this case. They will hire lawyers to fight fight fight their battle until its won. There is no opposition here to that, no balance to that sort of reaction, so it continues unimpeded towards this way just as easily and unstoppable as a gunpowder reaction to flame. As such, as soon as you think about putting a restriction on industry, it will serve to benefit investors of that industry first and foremost as it will be penned by that same industry you seek to regulate.

Why not? If it’s truly about the environment then everyone should pay based on their environmental impact. Sure, if carbon/methane/whatever can be shown to have a higher environmental impact when emitted at altitude or whatever, take that into account.

But placing the environment second to specifically target the “luxury” as some sort of way to “get” the rich is only harming your case.

No. It's about maximizing value per emission. The value of luxury goods is less than basic necessities (it's stuff we can live without by definition) so the rate should compensate for that.

I would accept a flat rate if each person got a fixed amount of emissions assigned to them and each person could decide to sell or keep their "emission right". Then everyone would have enough for basic needs.

In practice the results would be similar.

Better to simply charge emissions based on the cost required to scrub them.

Trying to inject value judgements into it turns the whole situation into an absurd government mandated ethics board. The precise task governments have shown themselves to royally screw up time and time again.

Afaik did ÖBB manage to reach net zero with night trains pre covid. That would be good enough for me

That's only because they are subsidized for the part inside Austria. Also you need some profits for investments in rolling Stock etc...

In France something like that has already happened:

"Under a government decree, any journeys that are possible in less than two-and-a-half hours by train cannot be taken as a flight. "

https://www.euronews.com/green/2022/12/02/is-france-banning-...

Or subsidies air travel less.

Or, shocking, let people take a flight if they want.

(I low-key hate flying btw and prefer trains for shorter distances)

Have you ever heard of climate change? Short trip flights are just a huge waste of the carbon dioxide emissions we can still burn safely

Reviews I've seen of these trains they took over have not been kind.

I have travelled with them multiple times some ten+ years ago when they were with DB, and they felt aged then already.

I'm following this awesome new train company, sleepers from east to west Europe. Haven't tried it yet but a trip is in the planning stages. It's been years since I took a sleeper. They also support Interail, which many of us probably enjoyed in our youth.

https://www.europeansleeper.eu

There is also a startup in the works:

https://www.midnight-trains.com

Unrelated, but there is something special about design in Europe in general. I can find it in space, form, color, texture etc. There is something that makes European design so original and special.

Yes. I think it is the light and the language. Modern European design exists in a work of long nights during winter, and gets more "European" the further north in Europe you go. So it is stark lines and bright solid colors that stand out from the background (think Ikea). The diversity of languages also encourages simplicity, with form communicating meaning. Compare Asia or North America where days are longer/brighter and languages less diverse, with designers going instead for intricacy and detail.

> languages less diverse

Probably in some places but definitely not everywhere

It's quite sad the most east they will go is Prague and even that only in 2024. But it's a good picture of the not very good state of railways in central Europe. At least Czechia is starting to invest in higher speeds, but it will take years to take effect.

EU sleeper works, but the experience is ... rather traditional. Maybe one day theyll have their own coaches. Right now they rent whatever is available. Some of their couchettes are ex-GDR. Their sleeping cars are ex-CIWL from the 50s, rebuilt several times.

My partner and I tried that this year, the Berlin to Brussels route, with mixed results.

It definitely works, we got to our destination on time and we were mostly happy with the result. However:

* We booked a sleeping compartment, but then they emailed the night before the trip to say they didn't have sleeping compartments, so we got a private couchette instead. That's not a huge downgrade, but the communication was very poor and for a long time it wasn't clear what we were actually getting. * The carriages they were using were mostly very old stock, we suspect ex-ÖBB/DB. They were loud! Also not hugely comfortable either. We didn't really sleep at all, and we're fairly used to sleeping in loud spaces. They mentioned that we should be aware that not all plug sockets and toilets were working properly - for us it was all fine, but I suspect some of the carriages just aren't working properly anymore. * It was expensive. That's fine if you're trying something out for an adventurous holiday, or you're taking advantage of the interail ticket, but we're trying to get from our home in Europe to my parents and friends in the UK at least a couple of times a year, without being so reliant on plane travel. More options means more competition, which will hopefully reduce prices in the long term, but and I realise that there are good reasons why planes are so cheap in comparison, but it's still disappointing.

All that said, we're definitely expecting to use the train for at least one leg of most of our future trips, either European Sleeper or one of the other alternatives that are springing up. So overall, I guess I'd recommend the experience.

> They were loud! Also not hugely comfortable either. We didn't really sleep at all

We tried Munich-Rome once and it was not really good experience, especially because windows were dirty, beds are small and not comfortable. Narrow space, poor sound isolation.

The article gives very little detail about how the train is set up.

There are some interesting ideas about how to preserve individual privacy within the same form factor. Those are probably better explained here:

https://youtu.be/7pZkdvbgTnI?si=wmmffLYS_nhcnNQQ

Those mini-suite definitely look pretty cool. I'm usually not a fan of sleeping in the same place of strangers (even with friends it's hard), but those mini-cabines look great.

Don't take the ÖBB night-train from Zürich HB to Amsterdam and back. They sell you the premium package online with fancy pictures of their new trains but the train that shows up is an old 1970 rail car with both toilets locked (broken for weeks I found out), broken doors, broken heater, missing ladders, broken window blinds etc.

At this time if they can't even clean the toilets then it is not worth the steep price.

Here is a video of the squeaking noise we had all night (sounds like the rail car is about to break in half): https://www.youtube.com/shorts/GLNqpCfIawc

The toilets: https://imgur.com/gZqhDvz , even better was that the toilets in the other attached rail carriages had no toilet paper (Amsterdam -> Zürich)...

Additionally from Amsterdam to Zürich 3 people got robbed while still in the Netherlands. This train is reservation only, they could at least lock the doors or something to prevent criminals from boarding.

I would have been more comfortable with a seat in the 1st class SBB carriage that rides along than a private cabin and it would have cost a lot less.

I'm not sure why your toilets link goes up a video of a cute cat sleeping. Not that I mind. Has it been taken down?

I think I fixed it now, lol

> Additionally from Amsterdam to Zürich 3 people got robbed while still in the Netherlands. This train is reservation only, they could at least lock the doors or something to prevent criminals from boarding.

compartments can be locked, locking up the entire train and having the entire boarding process be bottlenecked on ticket inspectors seems highly impractical

Having the ticket control at station building before accessing the platform (airport alike) can be very fast when efficiently done.

ok, just quickly change the entire layout of every station in Central Europe to have ticket control

Amsterdam Central Station already has this infrastructure for the train to the UK.

On exactly 1 platform out of 15 though, and it took several years to rework all the access routes to and from that platform. It is also already much too small for all the extra capacity it will need when Eurostar intends to start using longer trains.

>On exactly 1 platform out of 15 though

Given the relative frequencies of domestic trains vs. international sleeper trains I'm not sure this is a problem.

ideally yes but i don't think it can be done with the current organizational structure of the european rail network. not consistently, only bilaterally

There is already a bottleneck on these trains because the staff need to bring you to the compartments. Unlike regular trains there is a lot of staff (one per carriage).

Boarding in Zürich you can only enter in one door for the sleeper.

Also most stations are exit only and no new passengers can board.

> There is already a bottleneck on these trains because the staff need to bring you to the compartments.

No, that's just not how it works most of the time with ÖBB, not even in Nightjet. I walk in and the ticket inspection happens later. Yes there's staff outside with NJ to sort you in, but you can walk around them. At no point are they a real bottleneck.

That wasn't the case when I entered at Zürich HB at 22:30.

I cannot believe that I had a better experience taking the Amtrak in the US than you had with ÖBB :D

Anecdotes - either yours or theirs - are not evidence of overall problems or quality.

They are evidence, but due to selection effects they're generally a small amount of evidence (with the amount depending on the expected size of relevant population - in this case passengers seeing this HN story).

I've taken that route in a couchette car twice. I haven't had any issues and didn't find the quality of the service to be any different than other NightJets. I mean, it's not exactly luxury travel (in a couchette car), but I have nothing to complain about.

I'm not a fan of the fact that ÖBB couchette compartments don't have locks on their doors. But the sleeper cabins do. Were the people who were robbed in a sleeper?

> I'm not a fan of the fact that ÖBB couchette compartments don't have locks on their doors

The ones I know have both a turning lock that can be opened from the outside by the conductor or anyone else with a wrench (so more of a protection against someone mistakenly stumbling into your compartment in the middle of the night), as well as a deadbolt that can't be opened from the outside without ripping it apart.

I'm guessing this is what happened to me. I was robbed overnight in a sleeper car, which I assumed was safe because there were literally 3 locks on the door. This seems to be a pretty common occurrence

One-off anecdotes are not evidence of systemic problems. What evidence do you have that any of what you described is common?

Multiple commenters describe taking the OBB night train and speak highly of it.

Edit: https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=37810476

Apparently it's location specific.

> However, the different forms of downgrades and downgrades affect the destinations differently. Most of the downgrades from sleeping to couchette carriages were available to La Spezia. Double downgrades – i.e. from sleeping to seat carts – are hard to find in the data. Downgrades or night-chair downgrades or night-chair hooks meet the Zurich destination. A downgrade from compartment cars to large-capacity cars was again almost standard in the last two months at the Bregenz destination

Problems with the Zürich <-> Amsterdam line are constantly in the news[1]. I was not the only person on this train that had issues. I voiced mine at a later time directly with ÖBB unlike others that complained to the staff which were not at fault here. It is a systematic problem and the nigthjet in this state should not be offered if they can't keep it up to a minimum standard.

I don't have a problem with a 1970's train but then don't sell me a trip in a modern rail car with a 360 walkthough on the website when it isn't what I am getting. Working toilets (With toilet paper) is the only thing I would expect on a 9 hours trip, everything else I don't care about.

[1] https://www.travelnews.ch/on-the-move/24452-viel-aerger-mit-...

[2] https://www.blick.ch/schweiz/zuerich/aargauer-erlebt-nachtzu...

If a hotel chain uses pictures from one hotel to advertise another, that's false advertisement.

OBB should be held to the same standard.

Yes and I did bring this up when I wrote a complaint to the ÖBB after my trip. They offered a certificate for another trip but I would have rather just had some cash back.

We took the Zürich to Amsterdam connection on Thursday evening and were told that the couchette wagon that we had booked was not available once we were on the platform. It was replaced by an SBB first class coach. Those are usually nice but not for an 11 hour ride. Furthermore, the lights don't dim that much so it was hard to sleep. My pregnant wife resorted to sleep on the floor. The breakfast that comes with a couchette booking was also missing. We were not offered any compensation and were told to write to OeBB.

Write them and list all that wasn't as advertised. It takes a long time for a reply and you will probably only get a coupon but the more people complain the more likely they will stop these shenanigans.

This is what I did and they gave me a coupon for at least part of what I paid but I have no use for it as I almost never travel to Austria.

I was robbed on the train from Zurich to Vienna. Even with the 3 door locks, somehow a thief was able to open the door and go through all my belongings without waking me. It is much more common than ÖBB would like people to know, and they do absolutely nothing about it once reported. I loved taking the night train, but I'm not sure I would recommend it, based on the chance of getting robbed alone

The article is a bit short on photos and options. There are some more here, although still not completely clear how they actually look like in terms of actual space and comfort https://www.nightjet.com/de/komfortkategorien/nightjet-neue-...

But otherwise they look nice. I am not a big fan personally because it's not so easy to sleep, but it's a dream for traveling with small kids. You put them in bed and they wake up next day 6-7am for breakfast. Then they sit down in pyjamas, drink hot chocolate or tea, butter their bread, and watch the landscape as you roll to your destination.

I love travelling by train. You are not treated like a criminal before you can board a train. You can sit and watch the landscape pass by. It's comfortable.

> You are not treated like a criminal before you can board a train.

Is this a reference to airport security?

Edit: not sure why I was downvoted -- I genuinely don't understand this statement.

Yes

Is there something specific about airport security you think could change to make you feel less like you're being treated like a criminal?

Get rid of half of it. Especially the liquid limits, unnecessary pat downs, shoe removal, etc.

The shoes and belts thing is ridiculous, I agree. But there's a legitimate reason for the liquid ban to which I'm not sure there's much of a solution, is there?

Not the original commentor, but I'd say two things:

* Airport security got much more invasive post-9/11. For decades before that, people flew safely without these tight security measures. So, how much of the intensification is actually preventing another 9/11 versus just making us all feel like the government "did something"? I don't have an answer (genuinely I don't know :), but there are opinions all over the spectrum here.

* Even if we do accept that all the security steps are necessary and there isn't much we can change, we can still find it miserable and dehumanizing.

So, being able to travel by train, where security checks are either noninvasive or not even required, is a breath of fresh air. That's the point the commentor was making. They weren't proposing they could fix airports.

The issue with removing these kind of regulations is always the same: there's fairly little political goodwill to be gained by it, and massive amount of potential loss if it were to backfire. So it just doesn't happen. It's why it's so important to fight pointless security theaters like this before they are introduced, because it is night impossible to get rid of them later.

This confuses me, because it seems like almost everyone I talk to, across the political spectrum, thinks airport security is overkill.

Conservatives could argue for reducing it because it might save money, and liberals could argue for reducing it because it might reduce incidence if racial profiling.

And yet nobody is actually doing anything about it... I wonder why.

Yeah, I am not saying you're wrong, I am honestly just confused by it.

Perhaps it's that few pols are willing to roll back restrictions and then be "responsible" next time there's a terrorist attack. Kinda like how Dukakis was big into rehabilition and forgiveness for prisoners, which was great until a released prisoner committed violent crimes and of course then the blame is laid on Dukakis.

In reality, there were a lot of those measures already before 9/11 - they stopped giant wave of plane hijackings in early 70s.

We can get back to not taking shoes off, but getting rid of xrays is not going to do well.

There are plenty of public places with as much people (if not more) than a typical airplane with free access without liquid/luggage/identity checks, yet they don't seem to be blowing up every other day.

If those checks were actually deterring terrorism I'd expect those other public places with less checks but just as much potential victims be attacked instead.

Is there a legitimate reason for the liquid ban? AFAIK it was a response to a failed terrorist attempt similar to the shoe bomber, but it's likely that the ban has little to no effect on overall safety.

https://www.schneier.com/blog/archives/2020/03/tsa_admits_li...

That article you linked is just one big causal fallacy. It claims that the TSA admitted that the liquid ban was bullshit, citing a Slate article which does not itself even quote the TSA lol.

I'm not a chemist, but I'm under the impression that the liquid explosives in the 2006 plot are a much more feasible approach to explosives than what the shoe bomber attempted.

I'm also not going to pretend like I have any idea how effective any of these security measures are, I'm only explaining that I'm under the impression that there's at least a real precedent for them.

I don't know what the solution is to terrorism in air travel, but it's a very hard problem and the liquid limit isn't something that personally bothers me that much -- who wants to carry around full bottles of shampoo and shower soap and whatever else anyway?

I can't help but think the liquid limit was put in to limit drinking as well, thats a big part why its a thing at stadiums and other events. If they let you bring in a water bottle people would fill it with vodka and then you get 300 frat boys throwing up on the plane to panama city beach.

Don't they still allow you to bring duty-free alcohol on board? I'm not a frequent flier, but as I understand it any liquids bought post-security can be brought on the flight.

Yeah but you aren't allowed to drink it. Meanwhile no one bats an eye if you are taking pulls from a plastic water bottle.

Whatever bottle of liquid they fear you have you can literally turn around and hurl at the crowd of 400 people in the tsa line behind you. Its total theater, reactionary legislation that helped establish an entrenched for profit security apparatus industry that will lobby for its existence until the end of time. If people want to cause harm there's no shortage of ways.

This isn't really a fair argument. As far as I understand, at least in the case of the 2006 plot, the bomb still needed to be constructed (i.e., ingredients mixed, detonator placed inside, etc). If you have something in a water bottle you're just carrying through security and it's volatile enough to simply throw at a crowd and cause harm, I don't think you've got a great chance of even making it very far, maybe not even to the airport in the first place lol.

Most of it is completely unneeded, to be honest.

The chances of another 9/11 happening are basically zero because of two factors: 1) better cockpit security, and 2) 9/11 happening.

Before 9/11, a hijacking meant you were going to be late for dinner. If everyone cooperated, it would basically just be an inconvenience. Since 9/11, a hijacking means you are going to die. Turns out near-certain death is quite a good motivator for getting people to fight hijackers.

Similarly, before 9/11 cockpit access was pretty lax. You weren't supposed to have other people in the cockpit, but it happened all the time. The door was there more to stop people from wandering in than keeping anyone out. Since 9/11 that door stays shut with very few exceptions - and it is now strong enough that breaking through the door is practically impossible. A pilot is never willingly going to open that door to a hijacker - see the "near-certain death" above.

This would still apply even without any passenger screening at the airport. You can't really do anything once you get on board the airplane, so why even bother bringing anything on board?

All valid points except the last -- you can still blow a hole in the fuselage and cause it to crash without needing to get into the cockpit.

Yes.

Airport security is mostly theatre anyway, it’s massively excessive for extremely low benefit.

Some countries (China is the most notable example) have security checks prior to boarding a train comparable to flying.

In Poland, if you buy your ticket for an Intercity train online, the conductor will ask for your ID to ensure the names match. The state, or perhaps just the operator, seems to be concerned about who is paying and traveling in this case. One can still buy tickets with cash, though.

Eurostar also has airport-style security between London and continental Europe.

Not quite as bad. Yes they scan your luggage but shoes stay on and it’s not some crazy full body X-Ray scan

And no liquid restrictions. They have special trays for the x-ray machines so you can bring in your coffee without spilling. And you can come back from France with a box of 12 wine bottles no problem.

The UK ditched airport liquid restrictions in December 2022 (although airports have until June 2024 to implement the change). Specifically, the 100ml rule is now a 2 litre rule.

Generally speaking you don’t have to remove shoes at UK airports, either.

It's also just quicker turning up 1h30 early for a Eurostar is very early, turning up 1h30 early for a plane can be a bit tight.

I find it interesting that LeShuttle (the same tunnel between France and UK, but where you drive your car onto the train) does not. They barely do any security checks on cars, and only seem to glance briefly at passports.

You're right that China has security checks for trains but I don't consider them comparable to flying. The train security checks are much faster. I've rarely had to wait more than 5 minutes in line. You don't have to take off your shoes, don't have to take out laptops and things from your luggage, and drinks and liquids are generally allowed. I've only on a couple occasions been asked by security in China to take a sip of an already-opened drink or reusable water bottle to prove that it's a drink.

The more annoying thing about rail in China is that many of the newer high speed rail stations are being built slightly outside of cities, and it often takes an extra hour to get to the station. Most of Europe's train stations are smack in the middle of downtown.

The shoe thing is an American peculiarity. In Europe I never had to take off my shoes, even when I flew to the US. And now some airports (eg LCY) don’t even require taking liquids and laptops out of the luggage.

In Beijing when flying to the US they confiscated water that I had bought post-security. There were people on the actual boarding ramp confiscating liquids. Wasn't good for me because my body needs to frequently drink water, I get dehydrated easily.

It didn't happen when flying to domestic destinations in China, so it makes me think the US requested that to happen.

Better bring a sack of fruit with high water content then. Maybe the security doesn't have enough imagination to clasify them as "liquids". For instance China is an exporter of pomelo. The fruit is also used as a good luck charm, consumed during the mid-autumn festival and used in Ganesh Chaturthi celebrations in India, so you could claim it's for "religious use" if they try to confiscate it.

Have you ever tried to eat a pomelo on airplane, let alone cut one open with the only shitty plastic knives you can get on board?

You can peel it without a knife. A bamboo knife is a lot more useful than plastic crap. Or get a Revolut Metal card. Perfect for opening pomelos, also perfectly acceptable for travel.

> The shoe thing is an American peculiarity

Possibly thanks to the shoe bomber.

https://en.m.wikipedia.org/wiki/Richard_Reid

Every time I'm in Barcelona or Frankfurt airport, they tell me to take off shoes. So I'm pretty sure this also applies to Europe, albeit not at every airport, and not even every time at BCN airport I've had to do so. Maybe depends on the people working the shift?

I recently took the train in Poland from Warsaw to Krakow and Krakow to Vienna and they never checked my ID.

Did you buy your ticket online from Intercity?

Yep!

In America, Amtrak also asks for your ID. But this is peanuts compared to the way the TSA treats people at airports.

They say that they check ID, but I've traveled dozens of times in coach and business (both with single-use tickets and 10-ride passes) and a handful of times in a sleeper, and I've never been IDed once.

They've IDed me a few times but they're not reliable with it.

I've travelled all over Europe and Asia by train and I fully agree. Even for night trains where you don't watch the landscape it's awesome that you can just fall asleep and wake up in another country.

The only thing I hate about arriving in a new place in the morning (by train or flight) is that hotels don't let you check in till afternoon, so if you by any chance feel slightly underslept you have to wait it out.

To be honest this is why I DON'T travel Amtrak anymore. Lots of sketchy people carrying who knows what weapons, no steward to watch bags when I'm supposed to sleep, etc.

One bad experience can burst that bubble for you.

> You are not treated like a criminal before you can board a train.

I have only taken one relatively long distance train in Europe, but they had security checks on par with PreCheck. Bags still went through a scanner and still went through a metal detector.

Checking bags is fine compared to the inconvenience of personal searches. Granted, many airports are quite lax (just take off jackets and remove metallic stuff), but scanning at Berlin airport was pretty thorough last time I was there.

Was it EuroStar? (channel tunnel) That's the only train service in Europe I've heard of that does any luggage check at all.

No, this was in Madrid to Barcelona on Renfe.

Spain might be a bit more sensitive about it due to the 2004 Madrid train bombings. Trains to/from Barcelona might also be considered high-risk due to the Catalan independence movement.

That is super uncommon in Europe.

train travel is almost always the most expensive option compared to car, bus or plane alternatives. from a sustainability perspective an insanely lobsided state of affairs, the result of a century long of distorted incentives and policies.

what could be more pleasant than being able to criss-cross Europe in night trains that are affordable, comfortable and sustainable? makes sense both for business and tourism. you cover a large distance overnight and you make best use of the day.

lifting half of the continent's population into near-orbital trajectory for its annual "sun vacation" migration just because it can be done and is "cheap" might come to be seen as a prime example of how human economics can float far away from any reality.

What you mean with expensive here? From the point of view of somebody who comutes daily, there is by far nothing cheaper than the 49 euro German ticket, similarly the Austrian climate ticket...

On commute distances with a monthly ticket, train has been competitive for a while, but longer distances are tough, especially if you’re multiple people.

As a student I used the Interrail ticket to travel all over europe on a shoestring budget.

Also there are plenty of offerings, which let you travel larger distances for a low price (e.g., ÖBB Sparschiene 29 eur vienna to amsterdam), you have to book it some time in advance though, similarly to flying...

Interrail is great - we spent 3 month last year seeing all of Europe. But it doesn’t include your country of residence, so visiting the parents on the other side of the state is not an option. And traveling with the cheap tickets and kids is hard - if you miss the train (which just happens with kids) the ticket is void. The ticket is not refundable if plans change. All of these downsides that a car doesn’t have (I still prefer train, but we can afford it). And for longer distances, train becomes hard - we’ve been to Mallorca by train and ferry, but it takes a few days instead of a few hours. And it’s substantially more expensive on top.

daily commute is a fairly different story. Night trains are about mid-range distances (say ~500 km) where you might also cross country borders.

Quite a bit further than 500 km; think 600 km (Amsterdam–Berlin) to 1000 km (Amsterdam–Wien). And that is leaving out the additional distance one might travel onwards or towards the night train's stations.

indeed longer distances are within the broader proposition of a night train network. leaving earlier in the evening and arriving before noon almost doubles the distance. though this comes at the expense of a shorter day.

now about that shift key... I think I read somewhere that capitalization is a relatively recent invention (like after 1000 AD). people used to do all caps and then they invented all lower case and then somebody had the idea of complicating things by mixing the two :-)

>what could be more pleasant than being able to criss-cross Europe in night trains that are affordable, comfortable and sustainable?

Doing it by plane at a fraction of the time and cost.

The interesting thing is that it that night trains can be quicker if you consider the waking. e.g. Zurich to Berlin - the train leaves at 8pm and gets in at 7am. So it is 2-3 waking hours spent.

(Does of course depend on how well you sleep on trains)

Copenhagen to Berlin overnight. You go to bed in the train around midnight and wake up in Berlin around 8 or 9. Nothing can be more convenient.

It's too close of a distance for a night train. It should take maybe three hours on properly developed railways that do not go around.

It has to go around because there's water in the way no?

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Fehmarn_Belt_fixed_link

At a fraction of the cost because air travel doesn't pay it's real costs in terms of environmental damage (or even taxes...).

The cost of flying is externalized on the environment; time can vary depending on actual distance, after you consider getting to/from the airport, or the last 100km to your destination. I think the two options are fairly competitive with one another.

The cost of trains are externalized on the taxpayer. If air travel received the same level of subsidies as rail, it would be essentially free of charge.

I'd rather pay the taxes this year, than have us continue digging ourselves into our environmental debt hole. Money is fungible, climate change isn't.

For the distances where night trains are feasible "a fraction of time" is not really true if you take into account the time costs associated with air travel:

* airports are usually far at the outskirts of a capital (45m travel there)

* you need to get to the airport 2h before to checking-in/passport control, etc.

* you need to wait to pick up your baggage (30m)

* travel into the city again (45m)

Not to mention the stress and high friction of every step of this journey, opposite to going to the main train station, which usually is pretty central, getting in the train, and sleeping the full night in a decent cot.

Drinking water. But you can buy 500mg of water for 5 Euros of course, right? Traveling as a family with with children, and when your departure is delayed, you can spend quite a bit just to stay hydrated.

Fortunately, many airports have taps with drinking water available. I don't understand why not all (e.g. no drinking tap & warm water only is available on the toilets), it feels like a conspiracy by the 5-Euros-water sellers.

Air travel is cheaper in part because it is subsidized [1].

Nothing wrong with optimizing for cost - if all externalities are properly priced. Otherwise its just egotistical behavior (don't mess with my habits) that passes as "common sense".

[1] https://www.transportenvironment.org/challenges/planes/subsi...

Train is also subsidized. In fact, while air transport benefits from tax exemption, train receives substantial infrastructure subsidy. The following report puts rail subsidy to be around 75B EUR, whereas air within 27B to 35B. The study is from 2007, but I doubt it has changed much.

https://www.eea.europa.eu/publications/technical_report_2007...

Very informative report. But as per its conclusion: "subsidies could be justified to balance the existence of external costs of competing modes, e.g. when an internalisation of the externality, for whatever reason, encounters strong political opposition from vested interests. This applies to some of the subsidies for public transport, especially rail, since its competing modes, particularly road and air, have significantly higher external costs".

In other words, it makes sense to subsidize rail, it doesn't make sense to subsidize modes with higher externalities.

It may very well be that rail subsidy makes sense and air subsidy doesn't. I'm not arguing for or against it. The original question pertains to why air ticket is cheaper than train. You and a number of posters here attributed that to subsidy, and I just wanted to point out that rail transport in Europe receives even larger subsidy than air transport.

There are many factors affecting pricing, for example occupancy rate. Load factor of aircrafts are in the 80 percentage - [0], whereas it's often under 60% for long distance Deutsche Bahn's trains in Germany - [1]

Another possibility is that train operators are often state owned and therefore face less competition and are less efficient than airliners, who are used to operate in a cutthroat environment.

Note that I don't claim either of the above cause train's pricing disadvantage, merely they are factors to consider. OTOTH attributing pricing advantage to subsidy is a lazy take of a complex issue.

[0] - https://www.statista.com/statistics/658830/passenger-load-fa...

[1] - https://www.statista.com/statistics/654973/long-distance-tra...

7% of orbital altitude is not near-orbital.

Its a nice thought though. Every time I fly I am amazed how quickly this mode of travel has been trivialized in peoples minds. Barely anyone even looks outside the window...

I am pretty sure that if we ever invent wormhole travel and reach the outer limits of the universe, in a few generations Homo Sapiens will think thats just the most mundane thing :-)

Given that I have yearly subscription for trains they are essentially free per use for me. Hard to beat.

Night trains are already competitively priced in parts of Europe if you factor in the hotel night you save. Take Amsterdam to Innsbruck:

Travel 1000 km by car, and you arrive late at night, exhausted, go to sleep at your accommodation, and get up in the morning for the start of your itinerary. Don't forget to factor in the costs of wear-and-tear on your car for those 1000 km.

Take a night train, and you get to leave much later in the day, but end up at the same point as the car example above, but the cost of the night's accommodation (the train) was already part of your ticket.

Same for the return journey.

The current market situation is not perfect — this only works for places within reach of the night train network by a few hours of additional transit at most — but night trains are gradually becoming an attractive option for more and more people in Europe. ÖBB took a gamble a decade or so ago by taking over the DB night train lines, and they are now the market leader with a fairly good track record.

Night trains form the backbone of my holidays further a field in Europe. It's only getting better.

Your shift-key is broken by the way.

Sadly commercial aviation fuel is currently tax exempt in the EU while the railroad companies do have to pay taxes for the fuel and energy.

If aviation fuel was taxed at 100%, the ticket prices would only go up 20%. This alone would not make trains significantly more competitive.

Generally speaking, though, it doesn’t make sense to compare subsidies and taxes individually. Both planes and trains are already heavily subsidized, and if you removed all subsidies and taxes, I suspect planes would win handily.

> if you removed all subsidies and taxes, I suspect planes would win handily

Until all transport is long-term sustainable in terms of environmental impact the cost calculus is messed up. Check out carbon footprint ranking of different modes [1].

[1] https://ourworldindata.org/travel-carbon-footprint

Hm, I wonder if the Eurostar to Paris includes the emissions caused by digging the tunnel.

I did the OBB overnight train from Vienna to Venice a few years ago. I did the baller move and bought the 4 person sleeper room for myself, that came with a bathroom / shower. So from a privacy and point to point travel it was great.

From the restfulness point of view, not so much. I am not a light sleeper but the train was noisy and jerky and the bed narrow with your body perpendicular to the direction of travel so it kinda sucked. Not really a "hotel on wheels" from that point of view.

There was no security to deal with, however on the train from Budapest to Vienna that I took the day prior was searched by armed police. Perhaps Vienna to Venice is a lesser destination for people the authorities want to screen out.

I don't have climate anxiety and I fly around a ton. On a 3-week euro tour where money wasn't really an object, it's totally worth it for the experience to do the night train. If time or money mattered then this would not have been the way I'd go.

As an aside, I've seen the train at best "break even" on time and experience. The Acella between Boston and NYC, and the Eurostar between Paris and London take longer than flying, even when factoring in the travel to the airport. If you want the uninterrupted train time to read or snooze then maybe it comes out ahead. Price wise the train is way less practical but with the company paying for my travel that's not an issue.

As Americans it's customary for us to genuflect to Europe for it's enlightened train connectivity and there are places where that works very well (eg Paris to Stroudsburg) but for cross-country travel it's not really that great.

One does not have to have climate anxiety to want to fly less.

Flying for me represents step 1 to an adventure, seeing family, or a in person work/business colab. So from that point of view I want to fly as much as possible.

Train represents a potential for the same travel but usually looks worse in contrast to flying in terms of money and time.

So unless taking the train is the point in and of itself (as in my Vienna to Venice adventure) it's seldom worth it. So yes I don't think I want to fly less.

The one exception to that is with little kids. NYC to Cleveland is a sub-hour flight or a 7 hour drive. As a single guy I flew. Now I drive at night so the wife and kids can sleep through it. Maybe that's a bit analogous to the night train though it's also very cheap.

"Climate anxiety" this reads as if you're being defensive about not flying. Weird choice of words.

The first sentence of the story talks about obb introducing these trains as a less poluting alternative.

As a customer, that is more or less valuable to you depending on how much you worry about the impact of planes on the environment. I am self identifying as someone for whom that isn't one of the decision criteria. If that was my number one concern then I wouldn't fly. But then I guess I wouldn't travel via any mode.

Ah gotcha

Thank you for prompting me, I realize I didn't articulate this in my first comment.

As someone who has traveled on OBB and non-acela Amtrak, how would you describe Acela journey? Is it a significantly better experience?

I mean its very hard to compare an overnight train experience with a few blues Boston to NYC. The Acella is fine you have a large seat with some space around you and pretty crappy wifi. Definitely more comfortable than a coach airline seat maybe in line with business class space and comfort wise but otherwise not that not worthy.

I see. Thanks for replying!

As an Austrian, I must say that I am amazed that this is even a topic here ... let alone a topic that gathers so many comments. I thoroughly appreciate all the comments and insights.

Personally, my only complaint I ever had about the ÖBB was that they got rid of the repeating noise trains used to make. A noise they used to advertise with in the past.

It's called "Continuous Welded Rail". More expensive in initial installation, but way cheaper in maintenance and as a bonus it has better ride performance too.

Thank you, I did not know the term.

In a perfect world, you’d be able to take a sleeper from Berlin to Barcelona. This has been invented a century ago.

I was hoping that the next generation of trains, will have affordable bunks with more privacy for people that travel solo. Think Japanese capsule hotel style. Sleeping together in a tiny room with 5 strangers is not for everyone.

yeah, they have that, that's the picture in the article...

i don't know about these new night trains but oebb.at is what made our euro trip more affordable. We purchased our eurail pass but then got so confused as to how to purchase the reservations on italian high speed trains using the reduced eurail rates. Eurail's website wasn't showing the routes and trenitalia doesn't have pricing for eurail holders either. Then I learned from some eurail forum that we had to go through oebb's website to purchase the reservations. Thank you oebb and thank you revolut for making USD -> CHF, EUR, GBP conversions super easy.

Eurail is such a mess. I dealt with it and figured out all the reservations this past summer but it definitely wasn’t easy. Lots of work to be done on their end to improve that experience.

There is a video on YouTube where you can see more about the new trains https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=WGZU5a10FKQ

Here's the product page with more info and photos: https://www.nightjet.com/en/komfortkategorien/nightjet-neue-...

The press release (permalink not working) says you can buy tickets starting Oct 11: https://presse-oebb.at/News.aspx?l=English

One thing that I am missing for all (well, I have booked with 4 in the last years) european night train operators is bed size. Why is this so hard? Sometimes beds are 180cm (6 foot) at best, sometimes (Vy night train to north of sweden) even my friend who is over 2m has plenty of space. Are these web sites & texts written exclusively by and for small women?

Sweden's loading gauge width at 3400mm is quite a bit wider than UIC 3150mm, which thus allows for longer beds (but you have to stay in Sweden rather than being able to go all over Europe...)

https://en.m.wikipedia.org/wiki/Loading_gauge

I took one of the old ones, years ago, from Innsbruck to Vienna. It was cozy and comfortable. This looks like a nice upgrade though.

some better pictures:

https://cdn.unitycms.io/images/B3xgjT5VKrOBi3OFxMgcwg.jpg

https://cdn.unitycms.io/images/4q-19tAT4oK9oK30Ixmj8X.jpg

https://cdn.unitycms.io/images/1_Dc-8xza4J9PihhMdWero.jpg

https://cdn.unitycms.io/images/74pOqbkA47qBwHpWxqyVFb.jpg

Why call it OeBB? Just saying ÖBB is no longer an issue in this day and age.

I for one don't understand why HN people are interested in this? I guess I don't understand HN, this is just so random. But the points speak for themselves. Weird.

The buses are better, trains only if no bus is available. Stay away from Rejio Jet and Flix buses are great. Anyone says different is a tourist.

Just wish they add a wagon dedicated for suitcases and others large or heavy stuff that don't fit in the cabine.

Otherwise, I like these night-trains :-)

Hopefully, they improve the website for booking these trains as well.

NJ routes are unavailable on apps such as Trainline, nor on “regular” Oebb ticket shop.

ÖBB night trains vary greatly in quality. I had the displeasure of taking the Zürich Budapest night train and back. It was absolutely terrible. Broken cars from the 90s, beds so short you can’t fully lie in them, defective toilets, blinds that don’t close, rattling doors all night, arrived 4h late… not something I’d do again.

Well it's not an ÖBB Night Train, it's a train operated by MAV-Start (Hungarian State Railways). It also says when booking that it's a partner train. Maybe do your research before complaining about the wrong company

I boarded an ÖBB train with a ticket sold to me by ÖBB and a partial refund for the delay from ÖBB.

Yes because you bought the ticket from ÖBB so they are responsible for refunds too. It's still a Train operated by MAV (and you also can buy tickets from them directly) and the ÖBB Nightjet Website explicitly tells you: "Der Umfang und die Qualität der Serviceleistungen in einem EuroNight Zug und das eingesetzte Wagenmaterial weichen vom Angebot des ÖBB Nightjets ab." "The scope and quality of the services in a Euronight train and the car material used deviate from the ÖBB Nightjet offers"

So no, you didn't rode an ÖBB Train

Okay. Isn’t it a technicality though? In the end of the day, ÖBB sells this through their website so they should stand behind it. It’s too easy to sell anything and everything and say “caveat emptor, it might be total shit or maybe not but in any case I’m only here to take your money.” See Amazon and how happy people in general are with their comingling problem.

That’s my opinion anyway, feel free to have your own.

No it's not a technicality? I can buy tickets from Deutsche Bahn for all kind of European Train Operators, including ÖBB Nightjet. It's just a nice service to have a unified booking system

I once found myself in the situation of needing an overnight train from Zagreb to Vienna .. the attendant at the Zagreb central train station had no idea how to book the ticket, had to dig out an ancient aging PC out from under some desk detritus to look things up, had a completely useless time of it .. I just gave up and rented a car.

Man, that was a nice drive - as much as I love the trains of Europe (they are awesome) the adventurous drives to be had in that region (Zagreb->Vienna) are also bloody awesome. Had a 2 hour drive to the border crossing, I thought was going to be smooth - only to be turned back because it was for EU citizens only .. but the adventure alone was worth it.

> Since 2018 OeBB said all its trains "run on electricity generated exclusively by hydropower, solar and wind power... a milestone for climate protection in Austria"

This is easy to debunk. Austria is part of EU grid, and other states produce big part of their electricity from coal and gas. Austria imports that electricity!

Plus some trains operated by Oebb are international!

Big companies like ÖBB can get their power through long-lasting power purchase agreements from renewable energy producers.

I guess it's one of the usual numbers games in everything related to climate.

"Each day, our trains pull x MWh of energy from the grid and we're paying renewable energy providers for y >= x MWh - therefore we can say our trains run on 100% renewable power."

Whether or not some of the electron domino that finds its end in a train's motor coils happen to have started in a coal plant doesn't matter for this calculation.

You can like this or not, but I guess there aren't a lot of better options as long as renewable and fossil power sources are both supplying the same grid and energy is effectively fungible.

Thanks for sending me into that rabbit hole.

So according to the company’s 2022 annual report, they source power from 8 hydroelectric and 6 solar power plants, all of which they operate themselves, as well as 4 partnering hydroelectric plants. The rest of their electricity needs is acquired from the market but checked for proof of origin.

Obviously this only covers railway infrastructure in Austria as they have no influence over other countries.

Source in German: https://presse.oebb.at/dam/jcr:f87d6627-602c-47d6-bec7-f5682...

Reply on news.ycombinator.com