Direct Train to Europe: London to the Mediterranean
bbc.co.uk
bbc.co.uk
I'm with you on the 4 hours, but I would be happy to criticize the security theater after 9/11.
It's also incredibly stressful for the staff. I was in line in the US once and one lady had a meltdown. She saw the queue of people going around the corner and basically just threw her hands up and quit. The face on her only colleague was priceless.
Add to that the fact that there seem to be some shortcuts taken. I was told if you miss a connection, they take your bag off for obvious reasons. Well, I actually missed a connection once, and the bag went on the plane and I got to pick it up when I caught up.
I'm not even sure what benefit it is to the government. I'd be more paranoid about silent security than easily avoidable theatre out in the open.
The whole thing (esp. the database-based pre-check scheme) is just so broken if there were and actual significant persistent threat that I wish we would re-evaluate the whole travel security procedure from a rational (rather than fear-based) perspective.
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.
Night trains are wonderful, they save you a night at the hotel, and they basically make the journey take no effective time from your holidays... but SNCF wants to get rid of them entirely, or so I heard.
I thought it was DB who wanted to do away with them. But maybe SNCF too. Due to European railway regulation and thoughtless implementation of the same by the individual countries, international (night) trains have become quite expensive to run. (This in addition to the obvious factors of fast daytime TGVs and irresponsibly cheap airplane flights.)
It will be "completed" in 2020, so we will probably see Trains going in this direction soon.
http://www.soundsurvey.org.uk/index.php/survey/soundacts_of1...
Falling down the stairs is a leading cause of death or injury on Britain's railways (no-one has died on a train since 2007), but I'd like to see some proof that the announcement makes any difference to people's behaviour. They play it pretty much any time it rains!
I don't like the fact, but flying is cheaper in many cases, and inside the EU security is (in my experience) not that annoying. I mean, I have a 50% rebate card and even inside Germany, there are quite a scenarios where trains are only cheaper than flying if I take regional trains, at which point the time advantage of flying suddenly is quite large, and coaches become an agressivly priced alternative. And that despite the fact that I have a 50% rebate card for trains.
Start to cross borders and it gets worse.
EDIT: not to say that trains are not used, but especially among young people coaches, ride shares or flying are strong alternatives. Trains are great for short distances and if you want to go somewhere that is hard to reach otherwise.
[0] http://www.deutschebahn.com/de/konzern/im_blickpunkt/9010944...
I trained around the eastern US a bit, and while north of DC the trains are heavily-used and a 'normal' experience, south of DC the trains were very laid back and comfortable. They're subsidised, so the tickets are dirt-cheap, few people use them, they're comfortable and spacious, have power for laptops, and even have an entire car dedicated to sitting in a lounge chair facing outward to watch the scenery roll by ("oh, more kudzu..."). The only downside is that the stations were only at major locations, so not many stopping points, which was fine for what I was doing.
When I travelled to/from Romania by train two years ago, border control officers got on the stop before the border, walked through the train to check passports and got off at the next stop, probably taking the next train back. This happened both going into Romania and going back into Hungary.
So, the UK probably wouldn't even have to join Schengen to make this a less painful process.
Joining Schengen and getting UK immigration boffins to board the trains and operate efficiently have exactly the same problem: they would require competent leadership from 10 Downing Street.
Who would want to do that?
Not only that, the Marseille train leaves London at 07:19! Great for people in London, not so great if you live outside. Firstly, it might not be possible to get in that early, and secondly, mid-week, peak fares in to London are extortionate.
I checked a fare in October (Fri-Fri, before half term): £178. Sat-Sat in October: £129.
Flying: £110 return with Easyjet, including baggage. Or from Heathrow with BA: £114. At more reasonable times of day. It's a 2 hour flight.
- Departure: how to arrive, time, expense.
- Journey: duration, connections, time of day, day of week, comfort, baggage, expense.
- Arrival: distance from destination, time, expense.
I think arrival is less of a concern as you're quite likely to be going to the inner city, and in Europe it's almost a given that there are reliable and frequent connections to the city.
Well I don't know... I live in France, and the lack of reliable, fast and cheap connections is exactly why I often take the train even when it's more expensive and slower.
The last time I arrived at Marignane, at 1am because the flight had been delayed by two hours or so, I had to wait for 1,5 hour, along with a few fellow passengers, for a shuttle to come even though it had been supposed to show up 20 minutes after we started waiting. The driver then explained us that "you're in Marseille, that's normal!". And he was kinda right. The shuttle was also late for the return flight, actually, just not too late.
I probably generalised too much with 'Europe'.
But when the 1:30 shuttle shows up at 3:00 and tells you that you should have expected it, I think it does tell something about the reliability and frequency of connections to the city.
The other systems I have experience with are Paris' RER, which is... okay, I guess, Copenhague's metro which makes the journey really easy, and Budapest's public transit which takes 1 hour and several changes. Copenhague is the only one I would consider reliable.
I agree that flying is generally cheaper though.
EDIT: London-Manchester is probably a good example of a good and popular train journey. While other domestic flights over the years have lost out to rail, London-Scotland by plane has remained popular.
London-Paris is better, at 50 min flight vs 2 hour train.
By the way, I'm not arguing /against/ trains. I love trains and flying is such a hassle these days.
That said, my favourite way to get to Inverness by train (I have family up there) is by sleeper train. It leaves London city centre at a civilised 2000, gets there at 0730, you can get your own cabin and the restaurant car serves a killer haggis. Plus people actually like being on it and like talking to you, and I've never met anyone on it who was dull.
...the sleeper train has to go specially slowly so as to give you a proper night's sleep.
Tube 30mins -> Euston 4h15m -> Glasgow Central -> 10m cab ride = 4h55m
Tube 30mins -> Liverpool St 45m -> Stanstead 1h -> Fly 1hr -> security/reclaim 30mins -> 20min cab ride =4h05m
But on the train you get 4 hrs uninterrupted work time and first class is often only £10-20 extra and gets you unlimited free food, booze and wifi. Way better value than a BA flight
> In fact, a few days ago, getting the train to the UK, only a few passengers boarded at Marseille. But the Eurostar filled up nicely at Avignon and Lyon where it stops as it heads north.
Good point about the change, though. That really renders the headline untrue. It's not a direct service.
(Seized contact lens solution bottle, I'm looking at you!)
"Everyone who boards an aircraft at Heathrow has to be security screened to UK government standards. Even if you've already been through security checks at another airport, we're obliged to screen you again before you fly from Heathrow."
http://www.heathrowairport.com/heathrow-airport-guide/flight...
I guess when faced with the choice of taking a risk-based approach toward security, and applying an equal amount of security to all, they chose the latter.
At least the UK lets you check through your bags, unlike the US.
When I change at modern airports, usually in Europe, I very rarely have to go out and back in again. In Geneva[1], the layout of the airport was essentially reconfigured around me to let me walk from one plane to the next. I was the only person doing it; I walked through empty glass-walled corridors, watching through the glass as other passengers went their various ways, guided by wall displays pointing me towards the next flight (no other flights on it; just mine) and at one point I got to a train platform cut in half by a glass wall. The other side was a hundred or so people, and when the train came, I was in one half, and they were in the other. We were likewise segregated at the destination platform. I walked all the way to the departure lounge before I reached a person, whose job was to let me in and not let anyone in the lounge leave through my private entrance. It was basically how you'd expect a modern airport to work; to know who on each flight needed to leave and who needed to be guided to another flight, and for the displays and corridors to provide it.
[1] I think it was Geneva.
Signed: a Schengen national that hates and avoids lay-overs in Heathrow like the plague.
(edited for tone)
I had to be at the international terminal at St Pancras in London a half-hour before the train left, though I think some of the more expensive business-class tickets only require you to be there 10 minutes early.
Getting in meant showing ticket, passport, and some routine security scans, the latter being quick and not nearly as intrusive or theatrical as typical modern airport security. (I’m a rather private person, and just the possibility of being put through one of the virtual strip-search machines at an airport is enough to make me not want to fly anywhere any more, even without all the other hassle and time required.)
On the train, there probably are some luggage limitations if you read the full terms, but no-one was taking a ruler to my backpack or weighing my suitcase and charging me extra on the return journey just because I had added a 1kg souvenir. My suitcase was within reach/eyesight throughout my journey, and there was ample space for smaller luggage right by my seat throughout as well.
Perhaps the most striking thing of all was that once I was clear of the UK, changing trains at Brussels (from the international Eurostar from London to an also-international Thalys to Amsterdam) was as simple as changing local services back home. The second train literally pulled into the station a few minutes before it was due to leave, I just went onto the platform, and the only fuss at all was because the train had reserved seating so someone helpfully checked my ticket and pointed out where my seat was as I boarded.
I haven’t travelled between many different places within continental Europe (as distinct from travelling between the UK and a European destination) but if that’s the norm within the Schengen Area then we’re doing it wrong. Transport systems should be primarily about getting the travellers to where they want to go efficiently and pleasantly, and most of Europe appears to be much better at those things than we are.
It's very nice, though Harwich is a bit of a dump (not very welcoming).
I would expect there to be a few real experts on HN, though. (I'm not one.)
Portuguese and Spanish tracks have a smaller width than the rest of Europe.
So Portuguese trains only travel to Spain (the few that exist). And Spanish trains have a system where they can change the width between the wheels when going to France.
Similarly, trains travelling between Belgium and Germany, if I am not mistaken, have dual electricity system.
There are different allowed widths and heights ("loading gauge") for train cars in different countries. Finally, few people know that the overhead lines veer a little bit to the left and right to spread the wear on the pantographs. The extent to which this happens also differs between countries, and some countries have narrower pantographs than others, which means that trains cannot just ride both in Germany and Switzerland even though they have the same electrical system.
Oh yes, also patents.
Currently railways are installing the European ERTMS system on many tracks, usually as a second system so both trains using the local traditional system and the new ERTMS can ride there. However, it is quite complicated and it turns out not all trainside implementations talk correctly with all railside ones.
I don't see why they have to leave trains at all for customs. This seems easily fixable.