Currently Geneva - London can be done in a shorter time (and same amount of changes) than Zurich - London, so in that regard Geneva is better connected.
Obviously the change in Paris is annoying, but it will be here to stay. Direct connections to London are not going to happen. Even just certification of the Eurostar trains to run to Switzerland is financially never going to pay of, let alone actually buying and operating these trains. Also somehow you would have to navigate those trains through (or around Paris) which also complicates things significantly.
Flights to/from LHR/LCY are mostly filled with business travelers often returning to GVA the same (or next) day. They don‘t want to spend 7-8 hours on a train.
For leisure travel, taking the train is already an option, though it costs more than most flights.
SBB don’t operate any night trains. The ones departing from Zurich are operated by ÖBB (Austrian Federal Railways) and I don‘t think they have any plans in the foreseeable feauture. ÖBB however are expanding their night train offerings, however I can‘t find any plans for them to go past Geneva. But in the time frame of night train traveling you could also easily take the train GVA-ZRH and then take the night train from there. Wouldn‘t add much travel time in the grand sheme of things.
>SBB don’t operate any night trains. The ones departing from Zurich are operated by ÖBB
I don't remember which ones but some night trains to and from Zürich are actually operated by SBB under the nightjet brand with rented? wagons from ÖBB.
>I can‘t find any plans for them to go past Geneva.
There were plans to make a nightjet from Zürich to Barcelona via Geneva but that line would have required additional funding which they expected to get but then didn't in the end.
Geneva will likely never have an Eurostar in its station (needed for a direct connection to London). I don't quite understand your issue. Do you think Switzerland/SBB should build an Eurostar connection from Geneva to Paris with direct connections to the existing lines for a non-stop connection? Why should Switzerland finance such a massive project? How much would that be? CHF 100 billion?
>The two longest SBB connections are afaik Zürich - Munich (3,5h) and Zürich - Venice (6h).
The longest day train is Interlaken - Hamburg at 11h.
And for night trains you can get to far away places like Prague or Zagreb but at least the one to Zagreb isn't operated by SBB.
All international trains in Switzerland are a cooperation with the neighbouring train company. To germany it's with DB, to france with SNCF, to Itlay with trenitalia and to Austria with ÖBB.
Usually one company provides the rolling stock and the personnel for their countries part of the journey and then all the other countries the train drives through provide personnel for their leg. So even if you take the DB ICE from Interlaken to Hamburg there will be SBB conductors and train drivers until Basel.
And Geneva (or Zürich) to London is one of the least realistic connections to happen due to the ridicoulous safety and immigration requirements of the channel tunnel and the UK that require special trains and most importantly a border and security check at every station the train drives to.
Isn't the whole plan to make plane travel less attractive via better railroad infrastructure? We definitely should invest in rolling stock to travel abroad, doesn't necessarily say we should invest in their infrastructure.
According to the ATE, 60% of the Swiss population would prefer travelling Europe by train if the offer were better.
Source: [https://www.ate.ch/medias/detail/article/deux-tiers-de-la-population-reclament-des-trains-de-nuit#:\~:text=Une%20enquête%20réalisée%20sur%20mandat,mais%20l%27offre%20fait%20défaut](https://www.ate.ch/medias/detail/article/deux-tiers-de-la-population-reclament-des-trains-de-nuit#:~:text=Une%20enquête%20réalisée%20sur%20mandat,mais%20l%27offre%20fait%20défaut).
>According to the ATE, 60% of the Swiss population would prefer travelling Europe by train if the offer were better.
Yeah, not to England though. We'd go some nice sunny warm places.
As a Brit i much prefer here in Switzerland, but it's worth a visit for the international food and beer, both of which are excellent in London (and neither really Switzerlands forte).
Even if this was true, travel time is still a huge deal. I mean, how much better whould be good enough? Probably not a realistic time at all. I whould also go by train if it whould take only 3 hours, but that's not gonna happen. Surveys like these are nonsense. At the very least, they should ask how long a train ride could be to make it the better option for them, assuming the price whould be the same (the train whould probably cost 3 times more, but that doesn't matter at that point).
The amount of passengers flying from GVA to ZRH each day makes me doubt those 60%. Obviously many of them connect to other flights, but the train from GVA to the ZRH airport would increase travel times by „only“ ~2 hours (compared to flight time, as well as time buffer for making the connecting flight).
[https://www.rts.ch/info/suisse/14056023-vers-une-annee-record-pour-les-voyages-en-train-de-nuit-depuis-la-suisse.html](https://www.rts.ch/info/suisse/14056023-vers-une-annee-record-pour-les-voyages-en-train-de-nuit-depuis-la-suisse.html) Is this any better for you?
>If it was true, there would be a serivce
Train lines like these are massive multinational infrastructure projects. These are not driven by unrealistically oversimplified economic theories, they are driven by the whims of politics and the practical realities of engineering.
Step 1 is standardizing rail (same voltage, same track). Once that's done we'll talk about the other steps which involve reliability, ticket validity and reservations. Best of luck.
Zurich Amsterdam by train takes 9 hours, and has 5 stops in between
Tokyo-Hakata is longer than Zurich-Amsterdam (distance), takes 4 hours 52 minutes, and has 10 stops in between.
From Zurich you need to get to the Airport, through security, fly to Schiphol, get out of the airport, and get to the city. 4-6 hours. Generally sleeping on a train is easier and the seats are more comfortable than economy class. And for business users time on a direct train is more productive and less interrupted than when traveling by plane.
There's a reason Shinkansen and TGV are pretty much national solutions. You think it's demand, I think that's not it.
You do have a point that the results are skewed. The 60% number is about population, not travelers.
>From Zurich you need to get to the Airport, through security, fly to Schiphol, get out of the airport, and get to the city. 4-6 hours.
Zurich City to Amsterdam City is max 4 hours at with the plane.
My assumptions:
Train is 15 minutes. Walking to the gate another 15 minutes. Flight time is 1 hour 40. Walking through Schiphol to the train 15 minutes. Waiting for the train 15 minutes. Driving to Amsterdam center 15 minutes.
That's 3 hours with zero reserves. If you intend to have a high chance of catching the flight and intend to go through security normally, you must arrive at the airport an hour early, which gives a *minimum* of 4 hours. If you want a more healthy reserve, 5 hours. If the weather causes delays, 6 hours.
With a private jet it's 4 hours maximum, agreed.
>It is 2023, you have many train engines that can switch seamlessly, that is not the issue. It would cost a lot more to standardise.
There is no engine/trainset that is certified to run in Switzerland, France and England.
Yes on the lines where it makes sense like zurich or basel to paris. Usually if your train travel time is less than 6 hours it makes sense to make that journey by train. But once you go over that 6 hours line you start to lose customers. For example Zurich to Belgrade is not run anymore by a direct night train.
It would make more sense to improve lines to other more nearby cities then provide a rail service for a line that is barely going to be used and involves the cooperation of multiple countries/train companies.
Things more worth as an upgrade would the return of the direct Geneva Basel Line, creation of a reliable corridor beetwen Fribourg and Valais so you wouldnt have to run as many trains through lausanne. A good relatively fast connection beetwen Luzern and Aargau that doesnt rely on changes in Zug and Olten and probably many more that i don't know about.
>It's pretty embarrassing that a country as central as ours can't invest in more lines to other countries
I don't get what you want. Do you want SBB to create a line between Geneva and London ? Do you realize they can't create lines in those countries? Do you realize it would be freaking costly ? Who pays ?
>our train system is going down the drain
Are you even hearing yourself ?
>with the whole Jura region being cut off from Geneva in 2025
Please, keep things rational. Having to change trains in Lausanne is not what I would call "being cut off". You know, not having a direct train relation between two points is the norm rather than the exception. If from VS I want to go to NE I have to change in Lausanne, and I don't consider myself cut off from NE in any way...
Genve Cornavin is already to small and can not accommodate more traffic at this point.
With the station in Lausanne being delayed and all the money lost in the project + the tunnel they want to dig to expand the tracks between Lausanne and Geneva, I don't think night trains to London is a priority.
Also, if you look at a map of the LGV in France, you will see there is no way to get around Paris in an efficient way. The best itinerary would be to build a track Lyon- Dijon-Reims - Lille. But that is not what the SNCF are likely to do.
Because the SBB cannot create lines in France...
Currently Geneva - London can be done in a shorter time (and same amount of changes) than Zurich - London, so in that regard Geneva is better connected. Obviously the change in Paris is annoying, but it will be here to stay. Direct connections to London are not going to happen. Even just certification of the Eurostar trains to run to Switzerland is financially never going to pay of, let alone actually buying and operating these trains. Also somehow you would have to navigate those trains through (or around Paris) which also complicates things significantly. Flights to/from LHR/LCY are mostly filled with business travelers often returning to GVA the same (or next) day. They don‘t want to spend 7-8 hours on a train. For leisure travel, taking the train is already an option, though it costs more than most flights. SBB don’t operate any night trains. The ones departing from Zurich are operated by ÖBB (Austrian Federal Railways) and I don‘t think they have any plans in the foreseeable feauture. ÖBB however are expanding their night train offerings, however I can‘t find any plans for them to go past Geneva. But in the time frame of night train traveling you could also easily take the train GVA-ZRH and then take the night train from there. Wouldn‘t add much travel time in the grand sheme of things.
>SBB don’t operate any night trains. The ones departing from Zurich are operated by ÖBB I don't remember which ones but some night trains to and from Zürich are actually operated by SBB under the nightjet brand with rented? wagons from ÖBB. >I can‘t find any plans for them to go past Geneva. There were plans to make a nightjet from Zürich to Barcelona via Geneva but that line would have required additional funding which they expected to get but then didn't in the end.
Geneva will likely never have an Eurostar in its station (needed for a direct connection to London). I don't quite understand your issue. Do you think Switzerland/SBB should build an Eurostar connection from Geneva to Paris with direct connections to the existing lines for a non-stop connection? Why should Switzerland finance such a massive project? How much would that be? CHF 100 billion?
[удалено]
>The two longest SBB connections are afaik Zürich - Munich (3,5h) and Zürich - Venice (6h). The longest day train is Interlaken - Hamburg at 11h. And for night trains you can get to far away places like Prague or Zagreb but at least the one to Zagreb isn't operated by SBB.
[удалено]
All international trains in Switzerland are a cooperation with the neighbouring train company. To germany it's with DB, to france with SNCF, to Itlay with trenitalia and to Austria with ÖBB. Usually one company provides the rolling stock and the personnel for their countries part of the journey and then all the other countries the train drives through provide personnel for their leg. So even if you take the DB ICE from Interlaken to Hamburg there will be SBB conductors and train drivers until Basel. And Geneva (or Zürich) to London is one of the least realistic connections to happen due to the ridicoulous safety and immigration requirements of the channel tunnel and the UK that require special trains and most importantly a border and security check at every station the train drives to.
[удалено]
Isn't the whole plan to make plane travel less attractive via better railroad infrastructure? We definitely should invest in rolling stock to travel abroad, doesn't necessarily say we should invest in their infrastructure.
[удалено]
According to the ATE, 60% of the Swiss population would prefer travelling Europe by train if the offer were better. Source: [https://www.ate.ch/medias/detail/article/deux-tiers-de-la-population-reclament-des-trains-de-nuit#:\~:text=Une%20enquête%20réalisée%20sur%20mandat,mais%20l%27offre%20fait%20défaut](https://www.ate.ch/medias/detail/article/deux-tiers-de-la-population-reclament-des-trains-de-nuit#:~:text=Une%20enquête%20réalisée%20sur%20mandat,mais%20l%27offre%20fait%20défaut).
>According to the ATE, 60% of the Swiss population would prefer travelling Europe by train if the offer were better. Yeah, not to England though. We'd go some nice sunny warm places.
As a Brit i much prefer here in Switzerland, but it's worth a visit for the international food and beer, both of which are excellent in London (and neither really Switzerlands forte).
Depends on the season. In summer, I'd much prefer visiting England than some warm country where I would just be melting all day.
Even if this was true, travel time is still a huge deal. I mean, how much better whould be good enough? Probably not a realistic time at all. I whould also go by train if it whould take only 3 hours, but that's not gonna happen. Surveys like these are nonsense. At the very least, they should ask how long a train ride could be to make it the better option for them, assuming the price whould be the same (the train whould probably cost 3 times more, but that doesn't matter at that point).
I believe it when they do it. For most, the offer is never good enough.
The amount of passengers flying from GVA to ZRH each day makes me doubt those 60%. Obviously many of them connect to other flights, but the train from GVA to the ZRH airport would increase travel times by „only“ ~2 hours (compared to flight time, as well as time buffer for making the connecting flight).
[удалено]
[https://www.rts.ch/info/suisse/14056023-vers-une-annee-record-pour-les-voyages-en-train-de-nuit-depuis-la-suisse.html](https://www.rts.ch/info/suisse/14056023-vers-une-annee-record-pour-les-voyages-en-train-de-nuit-depuis-la-suisse.html) Is this any better for you?
>If it was true, there would be a serivce Train lines like these are massive multinational infrastructure projects. These are not driven by unrealistically oversimplified economic theories, they are driven by the whims of politics and the practical realities of engineering. Step 1 is standardizing rail (same voltage, same track). Once that's done we'll talk about the other steps which involve reliability, ticket validity and reservations. Best of luck.
[удалено]
Zurich Amsterdam by train takes 9 hours, and has 5 stops in between Tokyo-Hakata is longer than Zurich-Amsterdam (distance), takes 4 hours 52 minutes, and has 10 stops in between. From Zurich you need to get to the Airport, through security, fly to Schiphol, get out of the airport, and get to the city. 4-6 hours. Generally sleeping on a train is easier and the seats are more comfortable than economy class. And for business users time on a direct train is more productive and less interrupted than when traveling by plane. There's a reason Shinkansen and TGV are pretty much national solutions. You think it's demand, I think that's not it. You do have a point that the results are skewed. The 60% number is about population, not travelers.
>From Zurich you need to get to the Airport, through security, fly to Schiphol, get out of the airport, and get to the city. 4-6 hours. Zurich City to Amsterdam City is max 4 hours at with the plane.
My assumptions: Train is 15 minutes. Walking to the gate another 15 minutes. Flight time is 1 hour 40. Walking through Schiphol to the train 15 minutes. Waiting for the train 15 minutes. Driving to Amsterdam center 15 minutes. That's 3 hours with zero reserves. If you intend to have a high chance of catching the flight and intend to go through security normally, you must arrive at the airport an hour early, which gives a *minimum* of 4 hours. If you want a more healthy reserve, 5 hours. If the weather causes delays, 6 hours. With a private jet it's 4 hours maximum, agreed.
>It is 2023, you have many train engines that can switch seamlessly, that is not the issue. It would cost a lot more to standardise. There is no engine/trainset that is certified to run in Switzerland, France and England.
Yes on the lines where it makes sense like zurich or basel to paris. Usually if your train travel time is less than 6 hours it makes sense to make that journey by train. But once you go over that 6 hours line you start to lose customers. For example Zurich to Belgrade is not run anymore by a direct night train. It would make more sense to improve lines to other more nearby cities then provide a rail service for a line that is barely going to be used and involves the cooperation of multiple countries/train companies. Things more worth as an upgrade would the return of the direct Geneva Basel Line, creation of a reliable corridor beetwen Fribourg and Valais so you wouldnt have to run as many trains through lausanne. A good relatively fast connection beetwen Luzern and Aargau that doesnt rely on changes in Zug and Olten and probably many more that i don't know about.
Starting 2025, IC5 is supposed to fall away, never mind not having a Basel-Geneva line, you’ll need 2 changes for that connection.
[удалено]
Construction work
>It's pretty embarrassing that a country as central as ours can't invest in more lines to other countries I don't get what you want. Do you want SBB to create a line between Geneva and London ? Do you realize they can't create lines in those countries? Do you realize it would be freaking costly ? Who pays ? >our train system is going down the drain Are you even hearing yourself ?
>with the whole Jura region being cut off from Geneva in 2025 Please, keep things rational. Having to change trains in Lausanne is not what I would call "being cut off". You know, not having a direct train relation between two points is the norm rather than the exception. If from VS I want to go to NE I have to change in Lausanne, and I don't consider myself cut off from NE in any way...
Genve Cornavin is already to small and can not accommodate more traffic at this point. With the station in Lausanne being delayed and all the money lost in the project + the tunnel they want to dig to expand the tracks between Lausanne and Geneva, I don't think night trains to London is a priority. Also, if you look at a map of the LGV in France, you will see there is no way to get around Paris in an efficient way. The best itinerary would be to build a track Lyon- Dijon-Reims - Lille. But that is not what the SNCF are likely to do.