daily menu » rate the banner | guess the city | one on oneforums map | privacy policy | DMCA | news magazine | posting guidelines

Go Back   SkyscraperCity > Infrastructure and Mobility Forums > Railways

Railways (Inter)national commuter and freight trains



Global Announcement

As a general reminder, please respect others and respect copyrights. Go here to familiarize yourself with our posting policy.


Reply

 
Thread Tools
Old August 27th, 2014, 02:12 AM   #1921
AlexNL
Registered User
 
AlexNL's Avatar
 
Join Date: May 2010
Posts: 2,629
Likes (Received): 537

Yes, the IC and Sprinter categories are basically all that the Dutch railways have to offer. There are a few exceptions such as Intercity Direct (which uses the high speed line) and Thalys + ICE, but we don't have much "true intercity trains".

There are plenty of railway enthusiasts who complain about the offering ("a trip from Rotterdam to Amsterdam takes as long as it did 40 years ago") but what they usually forget to mention is that trains stop more often.

The idea behind the NS offering is that running slightly slower trains but at a higher frequency is much more attractive to passengers than having "true intercity trains" that only run once or twice an hour, augmented by much slower regional (express) trains.
__________________
We are shaping the future
AlexNL no está en línea   Reply With Quote

Sponsored Links
Old August 27th, 2014, 09:15 PM   #1922
quimporte
Registered User
 
quimporte's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jan 2013
Location: Lake Geneva Area
Posts: 2,804
Likes (Received): 543

Quote:
Originally Posted by AlexNL View Post
Yes, the IC and Sprinter categories are basically all that the Dutch railways have to offer. There are a few exceptions such as Intercity Direct (which uses the high speed line) and Thalys + ICE, but we don't have much "true intercity trains".

There are plenty of railway enthusiasts who complain about the offering ("a trip from Rotterdam to Amsterdam takes as long as it did 40 years ago") but what they usually forget to mention is that trains stop more often.

The idea behind the NS offering is that running slightly slower trains but at a higher frequency is much more attractive to passengers than having "true intercity trains" that only run once or twice an hour, augmented by much slower regional (express) trains.
The same in Switzerland. SBB doesn’t work on improving speed.

The Swiss system is based on the principle that all the trains (wether IC, IR, RE or R) have to enter the central hubs (national nodes) each full or half hour, and then leave after a quick stop, without any regard for the distance between the stations. In this way, journeys between the main InterCity stations take slightly less than an hour (with the exceptions of Geneva-Lausanne [33 min.], Lausanne-Bern [66 min.], and Zurich-St. Gallen [74 min. including 6 stops!!!]).

Distances between the main national nodes (IC stations):
Geneva-Lausanne (60 km)
Lausanne-Bern (97 km)
Bern-Zurich (117 km)
Bern-Basel (100 km)
Basel-Zurich (94 km)
Zurich-St. Gallen (85 km)

Advantage: to change train takes just a few minutes.

Disadvantage: the distance/journey time ratio may be extremely high between the closest stations integrated in SBB’s nodal stations principle. Geneva, Lausanne and St. Gallen are not, but Lausanne will be in short time.

Currently, Bern-Lausanne is covered in 1h06’. With the new Twindexx trains (tilting double-decker trains) this route will also be covered in slightly less than an hour. SBB prefer to spend milions of CHF in buying new trains than upgrading once and for all the out of date historical line.

The concept probably needs to be improved, since there are as many exceptions than normal cases.

Last edited by quimporte; August 27th, 2014 at 09:30 PM.
quimporte no está en línea   Reply With Quote
Old August 27th, 2014, 11:54 PM   #1923
alphorn
Registered User
 
Join Date: Oct 2009
Posts: 31
Likes (Received): 11

Quote:
Originally Posted by quimporte View Post
The same in Switzerland. SBB doesn’t work on improving speed.
This is not true. AlexNL said that the journey between Rotterdam and Amsterdan did not get any faster in 40 years... in the last 40 years, the travel time from Zurich to Bern was reduced from about 90 to about 60 minutes (using Heitersberg and Mattstetten-Rothrist)

Quote:
Originally Posted by quimporte View Post
The Swiss system is based on the principle that all the trains (wether IC, IR, RE or R) have to enter the central hubs (national nodes) each full or half hour, and then leave after a quick stop, without any regard for the distance between the stations.
Actually it can either be under 30, under 45, under 60 or under 75 minutes. In Lausanne and Biel, the trains meet at xx:15 and xx:45

Quote:
Originally Posted by quimporte View Post
Zurich-St. Gallen [74 min. including 6 stops!!!]
Perfect example. Will be accelerated by using the new underground station in Zurich, by running two extra trains with only 2 stops and by using a kind of tilting trains (WAKO). The journey will be about 60 minutes in 2018.

Quote:
Originally Posted by quimporte View Post
Disadvantage: the distance/journey time ratio may be extremely high between the closest stations integrated in SBB’s nodal stations principle.
The trains aren't slowed down anywhere in order to have an exact 60-minute-journey, but instead were accelerated from above 60 to below 60. Or from above 45 to below 45. That's because the timetable was designed first, and then the railway network was built to fit that timetable.

Quote:
Originally Posted by quimporte View Post
Currently, Bern-Lausanne is covered in 1h06’. With the new Twindexx trains (tilting double-decker trains) this route will also be covered in slightly less than an hour. SBB prefer to spend milions of CHF in buying new trains than upgrading once and for all the out of date historical line.
Upgrading would take about 15 years, the trains will be here in 2. Also, the tilting trains can accelerate Zurich-St.Gallen and St.Gallen-Munich. And finally, the tilt feature was very cheap, if I remember correctly less than 100 millions for all trains.
alphorn no está en línea   Reply With Quote
Old August 28th, 2014, 12:30 AM   #1924
radamfi
Registered User
 
Join Date: Aug 2008
Location: Crawley
Posts: 551
Likes (Received): 58

Just in case it isn't clear, Amsterdam to Rotterdam is of course much faster now because of the high speed line. Mostly because the route is much shorter in distance than going via Den Haag.

But it would be fair to say that the route via Den Haag isn't faster, because there are now more stops.
radamfi no está en línea   Reply With Quote
Old August 28th, 2014, 01:15 AM   #1925
quimporte
Registered User
 
quimporte's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jan 2013
Location: Lake Geneva Area
Posts: 2,804
Likes (Received): 543

Quote:
Originally Posted by Suburbanist View Post
What are chances of reopening the French sector of the railway going on the southern bank of Lac Lman?
Currently, there’s three ongoing affairs concerning transportation on the southern bank of lake Geneva:

–a new motorway from Machilly (near Geneva) to Thonon
–the return to service of the railway between Evian and Saint-Gingolph
–the improvement of the navigation services on lake Geneva between France and Switzerland (services for frontier workers).

Concerning the new motorway, the deadlock that has persisted for the last 20 years, should be broken in the next five years, as the Vice-President of the Haute-Savoie department council said.

The Evian-Saint-Gingolph railway section has been abandoned since 1998. The discussions about putting it back into operation have been going on for the last 10 years. A return to service would cost 124 million EUR. European public funds are expected, that would cover 30-35% of the costs. But apparently no deadline has been fixed yet.

On the side of CGN (the boat company on Lake Geneva), the local border traffic increases by 28% per year. The lines starting from Lausanne (to Thonon or Evian) and from Nyon are reaching capacity constraints. Respective local authorities are complaining about a lack of funding, so it will certainly take years before anything really changes. Recently, the Swiss authorities modernised a boat at their expense, but for the next steps they expect a bigger financial involvement from the French. Cross-border commuters are good for the Swiss economy, but the reverse is also true. Public transportation on Lake Geneva has undeniably been left behind in comparison to the touristical offers with the old steam-boats.
quimporte no está en línea   Reply With Quote
Old August 28th, 2014, 01:49 AM   #1926
quimporte
Registered User
 
quimporte's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jan 2013
Location: Lake Geneva Area
Posts: 2,804
Likes (Received): 543

Quote:
Originally Posted by alphorn View Post
This is not true. AlexNL said that the journey between Rotterdam and Amsterdan did not get any faster in 40 years... in the last 40 years, the travel time from Zurich to Bern was reduced from about 90 to about 60 minutes (using Heitersberg and Mattstetten-Rothrist).
I have an old timetable of the years 1991-1992. At that time, Bern-Zurich was covered in 72’. Today, you can make it in 58’. That’s only 14 minutes better. Nothing to do with a high-speed program.

And as you mentionned yourself, the new line Mattstetten-Rothrist was built for the trains to fit the new timetable, and not for increasing speed itself.

Quote:
Originally Posted by alphorn View Post
Actually it can either be under 30, under 45, under 60 or under 75 minutes. In Lausanne and Biel, the trains meet at xx:15 and xx:45
Yes, but the concept of nodals makes sense only if all the trains meet at the full hour (or any other, but the same for all the trains). That’s why SBB will introduce the new Twindexx trains, so that Lausanne-Bern will also be covered in one hour.

Quote:
Originally Posted by alphorn View Post
by running two extra trains with only 2 stops and by using a kind of tilting trains (WAKO). The journey will be about 60 minutes in 2018.
That’s good news.

Quote:
Originally Posted by alphorn View Post
The trains aren't slowed down anywhere in order to have an exact 60-minute-journey, but instead were accelerated from above 60 to below 60. Or from above 45 to below 45. That's because the timetable was designed first, and then the railway network was built to fit that timetable.
I never said that some trains had been slowed down.

The network already existed before the Rail 2000 project. It has been partially completed with the Mattstetten-Rothrist route, but that concerns only the Bern-Zurich and Bern-Basel routes.

Journey times in 1992/2014:
Geneva-Lausanne (34’/33’)
Lausanne-Bern (68’/66’)
Bern-Zurich (72’/58’)
Bern-Basel (71’/55’)
Basel-Zurich (56’/53’)
Zurich-St. Gallen (72’/74’)

Quote:
Originally Posted by alphorn View Post
Upgrading would take about 15 years, the trains will be here in 2. Also, the tilting trains can accelerate Zurich-St.Gallen and St.Gallen-Munich. And finally, the tilt feature was very cheap, if I remember correctly less than 100 millions for all trains.
Yes, but the upgrading of the network should have begun 25 years ago, so that it would be completed now.

Buying these Twindexx trains is a short-term solution and does only postpone the problem. Double-deck tilting trains are not that faster than conventional trains (+15% curve speed), and are even less so since the tilting technology will only be usefull between Lausanne-Bern, and Zurich-St. Gallen (as regards the Swiss main line). Other sections won’t be speeded up. That will never replace a real high-speed solution.

Last edited by quimporte; August 28th, 2014 at 02:47 AM.
quimporte no está en línea   Reply With Quote
Old August 28th, 2014, 11:30 AM   #1927
alphorn
Registered User
 
Join Date: Oct 2009
Posts: 31
Likes (Received): 11

Quote:
Originally Posted by quimporte View Post
I have an old timetable of the years 1991-1992. At that time, Bern-Zurich was covered in 72’. Today, you can make it in 58’. That’s only 14 minutes better. Nothing to do with a high-speed program.
In 1991, the Heitersberg line was already built. Before Heitersberg, the trip was 20 minutes longer according to wikipedia. AlexNL was talking about missing improvements in the last 40 years in NL, and 40 years ago, neither Mattstetten nor Heitersberg existed in CH, so there were a lot of improvements in CH.

Quote:
Originally Posted by quimporte View Post
And as you mentionned yourself, the new line Mattstetten-Rothrist was built for the trains to fit the new timetable, and not for increasing speed itself.
Well, Mattstetten obviously DID increase speed, how else could arrive 14 minutes earlier? OK, the line is shorter, too, but that also increases point to point travel speed.

Quote:
Originally Posted by quimporte View Post
Yes, but the concept of nodals makes sense only if all the trains meet at the full hour (or any other, but the same for all the trains). That’s why SBB will introduce the new Twindexx trains, so that Lausanne-Bern will also be covered in one hour.
That is not true. If you run hourly trains, you can have all trains meet at xx:00 and xx:30. If you run trains every half hour, you can create nodes at xx:00, xx:15, xx:30 or xx:45 without any drawbacks. So Lausanne is currently working just fine, all trains meet at xx:15 and xx:45. The speedup from Bern will actually kill this: The trains from Bern will arrive before xx:00 and xx:30 while those from Brig and Biel will continue to arrive before xx:15 and xx:45, resulting in longer transfer times.

Quote:
Originally Posted by quimporte View Post
The network already existed before the Rail 2000 project. It has been partially completed with the Mattstetten-Rothrist route, but that concerns only the Bern-Zurich and Bern-Basel routes.
That is a big misunderstanding of Bahn 2000. All of western Switzerland profited from Mattstetten-Rothrist, even more so than Bern. Everybody else in western Switzerland got better transfer times (in Bern, Biel and Lausanne) *on top* of the faster line. Example: Bern-Basel got 13 minutes faster, Nyon-Lausanne-Bern-Basel gained 32 minutes!

Quote:
Originally Posted by quimporte View Post
Yes, but the upgrading of the network should have begun 25 years ago, so that it would be completed now.
It still would have cost several billion CHF while the tilting trains only cost 100 million extra. With them (and some cheaper line improvements) the goal of Bern-Lausanne in 60 minutes can be achieved. Getting somewhat faster is useless, you would have to wait in Lausanne for the other trains. Below 45 minutes would work again, but that would be very, very expensive. Also note that this line of one of the less used ones; better improve others first.

Quote:
Originally Posted by quimporte View Post
Buying these Twindexx trains is a short-term solution and does only postpone the problem. Double-deck tilting trains are not that faster than conventional trains (+15% curve speed), and are even less so since the tilting technology will only be usefull between Lausanne-Bern, and Zurich-St. Gallen (as regards the Swiss main line). Other sections won’t be speeded up. That will never replace a real high-speed solution.
Like I said at the beginning: Money is limited. The Swiss people voted against putting all money in a single high speed line. They wanted to have moderate accelerations everywhere and short transfer times, and they got them.

Last edited by alphorn; August 28th, 2014 at 11:38 AM.
alphorn no está en línea   Reply With Quote
Old August 28th, 2014, 12:12 PM   #1928
Vaud
Registered User
 
Vaud's Avatar
 
Join Date: Sep 2011
Location: Canterbury\Genève
Posts: 837
Likes (Received): 1586

Quote:
Originally Posted by steple View Post
But bear in mind that this line is still quite mountainous, like here near Grandvaux, between La Conversion and Puidoux (top speed: 100 km/h).

How would you build a high-speed line on this part?


There actually was this proposal presented last year by a politician:



http://www.24heures.ch/vaud-regions/...story/16471547

With those two tunnels, the travel time from Lausanne to Bern would be reduced to less than 45 minutes and cost CHF 2bn.

IMHO definitely not worth it, at least not until other sections have been improved. A completely new HSL between Geneva and Lausanne is envisaged at around CHF 3.3bn, and it would bring many more benefits since the traffic between both cities (and by consequence, cities beyond Lausanne such as Vevey-Montreux, Fribourg and also from Geneva to Yverdon-les-Bains/Neuchâtel) is much more important than the traffic on the line between Lausanne and Bern.
__________________
j' les trains
« Plus d'entrain pour la Suisse »
Visitez le Forum Suisse!

Coccodrillo liked this post
Vaud no está en línea   Reply With Quote
Old August 28th, 2014, 07:51 PM   #1929
quimporte
Registered User
 
quimporte's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jan 2013
Location: Lake Geneva Area
Posts: 2,804
Likes (Received): 543

@alphorn

Firstly, I have to repeat what I said. The goal was not to improve the speed itself – even if it did – but to shorten the journey to one hour. These are two different paradigms.

Secondly, high speed does not prevent short transfer times.

Thirdly, you put short transfer times on a pedestal. But many people only use one train and want to pursue to their final destination as fast as possible. Rail 2000 doesn’t take account of that at all. How many times do you really need to change train?

In closing, I’m pleading for a REAL improvement, that is to say a high-speed line between all the major cities (Geneva, Lausanne, Bern, Basel, Zurich and St. Gallen. We waisted far enough money on improving underutilised railways that don’t lead anywhere.

As we’re not really speaking about the same thing, we will never agree, anyway.
quimporte no está en línea   Reply With Quote
Old August 28th, 2014, 07:59 PM   #1930
quimporte
Registered User
 
quimporte's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jan 2013
Location: Lake Geneva Area
Posts: 2,804
Likes (Received): 543

Quote:
Originally Posted by Vaud View Post
There actually was this proposal presented last year by a politician:

http://www.24heures.ch/vaud-regions/...story/16471547

With those two tunnels, the travel time from Lausanne to Bern would be reduced to less than 45 minutes and cost CHF 2bn.

IMHO definitely not worth it, at least not until other sections have been improved. A completely new HSL between Geneva and Lausanne is envisaged at around CHF 3.3bn, and it would bring many more benefits since the traffic between both cities (and by consequence, cities beyond Lausanne such as Vevey-Montreux, Fribourg and also from Geneva to Yverdon-les-Bains/Neuchâtel) is much more important than the traffic on the line between Lausanne and Bern.
You have to consider it in a larger scale. The question is not how much time we can save between Lausanne and Bern. The question concerns the whole east-west network. Today, it takes 4h08’ from Geneva to St. Gallen (3h57’ with the ICN) and that’s totally crazy for a 357 km long journey. With decent speeds (250 km/h), it could be easily shortened to 2h30’.
__________________

Suburbanist liked this post

Last edited by quimporte; August 28th, 2014 at 08:31 PM.
quimporte no está en línea   Reply With Quote
Old August 28th, 2014, 10:43 PM   #1931
radamfi
Registered User
 
Join Date: Aug 2008
Location: Crawley
Posts: 551
Likes (Received): 58

Quote:
Originally Posted by quimporte View Post
Thirdly, you put short transfer times on a pedestal. But many people only use one train and want to pursue to their final destination as fast as possible. Rail 2000 doesn’t take account of that at all. How many times do you really need to change train?
Presumably a lot more people do this in Switzerland compared to other countries, because of the carefully planned connections. That is one of the reasons why CH has the most successful railway service in the world.

If you give up on this, people who currently get a good service, but one that requires a change of trains, will give up on the railways. Then it becomes a slippery slope, because if few people are changing trains, then SBB won't bother waiting for connections, making people one hour late. That is how it is in Britain now. People there aren't interested in taking the train unless it is direct because the changing experience is so poor.
radamfi no está en línea   Reply With Quote
Old August 28th, 2014, 11:20 PM   #1932
Coccodrillo
Moderator
 
Join Date: Sep 2005
Location: Switzerland
Posts: 7,200
Likes (Received): 766

357 km (are you sure that's the rail distance? because it's also the road one...) in 3h57 is 91 km/h on average, in 3h30 is 102, not much better (3h30 was the target time, to be obtained gaining 15' between Zürich and Lausanne (both via Bern and via Biel-Bienne), and 15' between Zürich and St Gallen. However, this speed increase has been abandoned in favor of more capacity.

By road, Geneva-St. Gallen is 358 km in 3h36 accorting to Google Maps, so rail would be comparable.

However, most traffic is on intermediate sections so a full high-speed line is not urgent at all.

I cannot find the rail statistics now, but they are quit similar to the road traffic statistics:

http://www.astra.admin.ch/verkehrsda..._JjKbNoKSn6A--

Lausanne-Bern is the least used axis, that's a fact. But new faster lines Geneva-Lausanne and Rothrist*-Zürich would be interesting, I agree. The planned Chestenberg tunnel, to be completed later by a second Heitersberg tunnel, doesn't convince me, and a compeltely new Rothrist-Zürich should be evaluated instead. But Lausanne-Bern...it's not worth, today it has only 2 IC per hour, with no seriously planned increase in frequency (unlike the other sections).

*Rothrist is where the new line from Bern ends
__________________
1.6.2016: Basistunnel!

für Güter die Bahn ~ pour vos marchandises le rail ~ chi dice merci dice ferrovia
Coccodrillo no está en línea   Reply With Quote
Old August 28th, 2014, 11:32 PM   #1933
Sunfuns
Registered User
 
Join Date: Mar 2012
Location: Basel
Posts: 2,426
Likes (Received): 361

If a new line were to be built between Lausanne and Bern some extra traffic would be generated simply because it would be closer time wise.
Sunfuns no está en línea   Reply With Quote
Old August 28th, 2014, 11:35 PM   #1934
Coccodrillo
Moderator
 
Join Date: Sep 2005
Location: Switzerland
Posts: 7,200
Likes (Received): 766

Would be the new traffic be enough to justify a new line? Is a continuous and endless traffic rise a good thing? That's not so sure.
__________________
1.6.2016: Basistunnel!

für Güter die Bahn ~ pour vos marchandises le rail ~ chi dice merci dice ferrovia
Coccodrillo no está en línea   Reply With Quote
Old August 28th, 2014, 11:40 PM   #1935
Sunfuns
Registered User
 
Join Date: Mar 2012
Location: Basel
Posts: 2,426
Likes (Received): 361

Basel-Zurich high speed line would be cool and if it's built for under 30 min journey time would also fit seamlessly with the current timetable system. The shortest route (via Rheinfelden and Baden) is a bit more than 80 km so such a line would certainly be technically feasible. No doubt popular among passengers as well only shortcoming would be a high cost.
Sunfuns no está en línea   Reply With Quote
Old August 28th, 2014, 11:42 PM   #1936
Sunfuns
Registered User
 
Join Date: Mar 2012
Location: Basel
Posts: 2,426
Likes (Received): 361

Quote:
Originally Posted by Coccodrillo View Post
Would be the new traffic be enough to justify a new line? Is a continuous and endless traffic rise a good thing? That's not so sure.
That's a philosophical question and maybe it's not however it's a fact that a new drastically improved transport infrastructure (railway or a highway) generates significant extra traffic which didn't exist at all beforehand.
Sunfuns no está en línea   Reply With Quote
Old August 29th, 2014, 12:24 AM   #1937
Vaud
Registered User
 
Vaud's Avatar
 
Join Date: Sep 2011
Location: Canterbury\Genève
Posts: 837
Likes (Received): 1586

Quote:
Originally Posted by quimporte View Post
You have to consider it in a larger scale. The question is not how much time we can save between Lausanne and Bern. The question concerns the whole east-west network. Today, it takes 4h08’ from Geneva to St. Gallen (3h57’ with the ICN) and that’s totally crazy for a 357 km long journey. With decent speeds (250 km/h), it could be easily shortened to 2h30’.
On a larger scale it doesn't really matter whether you save those 30 minutes between Lausanne and Bern or Zurich and St. Gallen, precisely because the line runs all the way between Geneva and St. Gallen.

Since the section between Geneva and Lausanne forms part of it, it is reasonable to consider it as part of that "larger scale". Of course you cannot save 30 minutes of travel time, but given the benefits that an additional capacity between these two cities would bring (e.g. serving again some abandoned train stations) I do think it is very reasonable to spend 1 more billion on that HSL than in the line between Lausanne and Bern whose single benefit would be to cut the travel time in the least used section of the line.
__________________
j' les trains
« Plus d'entrain pour la Suisse »
Visitez le Forum Suisse!
Vaud no está en línea   Reply With Quote
Old August 29th, 2014, 12:55 AM   #1938
Coccodrillo
Moderator
 
Join Date: Sep 2005
Location: Switzerland
Posts: 7,200
Likes (Received): 766

Quote:
Originally Posted by Sunfuns View Post
That's a philosophical question and maybe it's not however it's a fact that a new drastically improved transport infrastructure (railway or a highway) generates significant extra traffic which didn't exist at all beforehand.
This is true, but that doesn't mean that the new traffic justifies the new line. People might not to a certain trip because it is too slow, because it is too expensive, but even just because they don't want/have to.

If there was a much faster Locarno-Brig line traffic between Ticino and Wallis-Bern would increase, but how much? Certainly not to justify a 60 km long tunnel.

One could also compare how traffic evolved elsewhere in Europe: the Madrid-Barcelona HSL has been a dramatic improvement over the old line, and passengers likely grow 5 or 10 times compared to before, yet the busiest section hardly goes over 3 trains per hour per direction.
__________________
1.6.2016: Basistunnel!

für Güter die Bahn ~ pour vos marchandises le rail ~ chi dice merci dice ferrovia
Coccodrillo no está en línea   Reply With Quote
Old August 29th, 2014, 01:12 AM   #1939
Sunfuns
Registered User
 
Join Date: Mar 2012
Location: Basel
Posts: 2,426
Likes (Received): 361

Locarno-Brig obviously doesn't make sense, but that doesn't automatically mean it's true in other situations.

Madrid-Barcelona is further apart than from one corner of Switzerland to another. It's a line competing mostly with airlines not cars, very difficult to compare with anything in Switzerland.
Sunfuns no está en línea   Reply With Quote
Old August 29th, 2014, 01:31 AM   #1940
quimporte
Registered User
 
quimporte's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jan 2013
Location: Lake Geneva Area
Posts: 2,804
Likes (Received): 543

Quote:
Originally Posted by Coccodrillo View Post
357 km (are you sure that's the rail distance? because it's also the road one...)
Yes, I checked in the guide Le rail suisse en profil.


Quote:
Originally Posted by Coccodrillo View Post
By road, Geneva-St. Gallen is 358 km in 3h36 accorting to Google Maps, so rail would be comparable.
Well, journey times by train may be more and more interesting because motorways are becoming always slower. Traffic jams and reduced speeds close to the agglomerations probably extend journey times on the motorways.


Quote:
Originally Posted by Coccodrillo View Post
Lausanne-Bern is the least used axis, that's a fact.
Probably because it is inefficient.

Last edited by quimporte; August 29th, 2014 at 01:44 AM.
quimporte no está en línea   Reply With Quote


Reply

Tags
basel, zurich

Thread Tools

Posting Rules
You may not post new threads
You may not post replies
You may not post attachments
You may not edit your posts

BB code is On
Smilies are On
[IMG] code is On
HTML code is Off

Related topics on SkyscraperCity


All times are GMT +2. The time now is 04:43 AM.


Powered by vBulletin® Version 3.8.11 Beta 4
Copyright ©2000 - 2018, vBulletin Solutions Inc.
Feedback Buttons provided by Advanced Post Thanks / Like (Pro) - vBulletin Mods & Addons Copyright © 2018 DragonByte Technologies Ltd.

vBulletin Optimisation provided by vB Optimise (Pro) - vBulletin Mods & Addons Copyright © 2018 DragonByte Technologies Ltd.

SkyscraperCity ☆ In Urbanity We trust ☆ about us | privacy policy | DMCA policy

tech management by Sysprosium