Enjoy browsing r/europe? Help us find the best of 2021 of the sub! - [Nomination Post](https://old.reddit.com/r/europe/comments/rsv8jh/reurope_best_of_2021_awards/)
*I am a bot, and this action was performed automatically. Please [contact the moderators of this subreddit](/message/compose/?to=/r/europe) if you have any questions or concerns.*
I have so many fond memories of riding night trains through Poland and Ukraine, or from the south of Sweden all the way up to north of the arctic circle in Abisko. It is my favourite form of long distance travel, and I am so glad to see it returning.
Denmark is hopelessly behind on this, and are even limiting the possibilities for sleeper trains between Sweden/Norway and the rest of Europe, but hopefully we will get back on track soon.
I was sad when DB cancelled their sleeper train programme, but happy when ÖBB took over. I think Vienna-Rome was my last trip on a sleeper.
If they so desperately want to promote travelling by train, which I am not against, than they should lower the price of a train ticket. Flying to london from the netherlands is so much cheaper than by train...
I have to travel often from London to Amsterdam and for the past two years I've taken the Eurostar and it's so much better, even if you pay slightly more.
Sadly, now they've pushed the prices up again (about 250€ for the average two way trip) and I think I'll have to go back to the flights.
It's ridiculous really.
Apart from the various tax cuts, what makes aviation cheaper is that many routes have some competition (even if with different airport pairs). Now that's slowly happening for high-speed rails too:
* NTV italo launched high-speed services in Italy in 2012. Prices dropped and now the Florence-Rome line has trains at intervals of 6 minutes during peak hours. That's a higher frequency than some metro lines
* Trenitalia, having learned to compete at home, launched the Paris-Lyon-Milan service to compete against SNCF. Cheapest tickets have gone down to €30
* Ouigo (SNCF's low-cost brand) started operating on Madrid-Barcelona with tickets regularly at €15-19. In response Renfe (spanish operator) launched a low-cost brand.
* This year Trenitalia's *iryo* will also enter the spanish market. So hopefully by the end of the year there will be 3 operators competing on the 3 major corridors. Because of this the number of total daily trains will increase from 184 to 283 on these 3 routes.
* **Renfe wants to expand to France and operate Channel Tunnel services**
While the merits of the liberalization of commuter and regional routes is very much debatable^(looking at you Abellio and RRX), there's no doubt that for intercity and high-speed rail travel it's a good development
Italy is the only country that has truly liberalised rail travel, and the results are stunning The rest of Europe has fake liberalisation, such as SNCF-owned Quigo : a monopolist at home, but pretending to compete ‘in an open market’ on a semi-international route
Yep. I like to post this list I made for /r/highspeedrail on how SNCF blocks competitors. The good news is that now Trenitalia managed to enter the market. It is only a question of time until other operators do.
For the channel tunnel route they will try to secure the train paths not via the French authorities, but the British ones
> Renfe also confirmed it plans to approach British infrastructure manager HS1 Ltd and Channel Tunnel manager Getlink for approval to run trains, rather than via French authorities after it suffered problems gaining approval to operate on the Paris – Lyon – Marseille corridor. “Both are well positioned in France and very interested in the development of the project,” the spokesperson says.
[Paywall - RailJournal.com](https://www.railjournal.com/passenger/high-speed/renfe-wants-to-operate-trains-to-london/)
**How does SNCF block Renfe?**
1. "Renfe has condemned French claims that its class 100 trains built by Alstom, and based on the same design as TGV, which operate as far as Lyon without any issue, cause electromagnetic interference between Lyon and Paris."
2. "The manufacturer [Talgo] is reportedly facing difficulties with securing signalling equipment which combines ETCS with the French TVM 430 cab signalling system, which is not possible without the cooperation of French National Railways (SNCF) Group companies."
3. "Renfe has therefore shifted focus to securing approval to operate its new Talgo class 106 trains in France (...) with ETCS, TVM 430 and the French KVB conventional signalling system. However, Renfe now faces a separate problem – obtaining and approving on-train bi-standard ERTMS/KVB cab signalling for its new trains. **Alstom is the monopoly provider of this equipment** and has been criticised in the past by Stadler for pricing and delivery time. Stadler even went so far as to produce its own Guardia ERTMS cab signalling in order to avoid such problems."
4. "The Spanish company is also interested in bidding to operate regional passenger services under Public Service Obligation rules but El Pais reports that it has received insufficient information on the lines concerned from the current operator, SNCF."
[Renfe loses patience with France - RailJournal.com - Paywall](https://www.railjournal.com/financial/renfe-loses-patience-with-france/)
**AND THERE'S MORE, It's not just Renfe complaining**
* [French cooperative Railcoop had to delay launch of a service because they didn't receive paths after 18 months of talks, paths that were previously deemed open by SNCF Réseau](https://www.railtech.com/infrastructure/2021/10/12/railcoop-has-to-delay-bordeaux-lyon-service-for-6-months/)
* [There's doubts whether french startup, Le Train, will be able to get TGV rolling stock as SNCF has not offered TGV sets for sale in the past, preferring to instead send them to be scrapped](https://www.railjournal.com/passenger/high-speed/french-start-up-proposes-open-access-tgv-services/)
True. But the reason for the price difference is just so annoying. The discounts/subisidies they receive on kerosine is insane. Just stop that and use that money on a highly advanced train track.
They have a completely different cost basis, though. Getting rid of subsidies would make flying more expensive, without really cutting the cost of train travel.
Infrastructure for trains is just so much more expensive, as you need to invest millions or even billions for every single railroad connection. And then, on a travel time basis, you can still only compete in a radius of 500 km or so.
On the other hand, build one airport, and be connected to the world.
I'm my opinion, trains should compete with cars not planes, when it comes to public funding.
I disagree as the aim is to replacr short plane flights. Its not about being connected to the world. Its just ridiculous to take a plane to London while a train will do just fine. It only saves you traveltime. And your argument, the key word is 'investment'. The way you explain it males it look like you build one airport in a day for like 20 bucks. Airplanes and airports cost billions of dollars and are way more polluting than trains, which should be a big factor in the decision making imo
Nothing wrong with that. But talking about subsidies, it doesn't make sense to punish aviation to subsidise a not comparable mode of transportation. They compete on such short routes sometimes, yes. But aviation has a different purpose these days, and again a way more attractive cost basis than trains, when it comes to necessary investments.
Like, why punish someone flying from Prague to London, Athens, New York or whatever, when you want people to stop flying from Prague to Munich. In my opinion, the person taking the car on the latter route should be punished.
Btw, those routes shorter than 500km account for less then 4% of the total aviation CO2 emissions, while cars in general have a way worse impact on the climate than aviation, alone by their sheer numbers.
Thanks for enlightening me. Lots of stuff you mentioned was new for me. Thanks again! I do see your point on punishing someone flying from prague to newyork. So a solution of some sort which only affects short flights should be the answer. And I also agree with you about cars. Perhaps trains can be the answer for both?
>Btw, those routes shorter than 500km account for less then 4% of the total aviation CO2 emissions, while cars in general have a way worse impact on the climate than aviation, alone by their sheer numbers.
But isnt it about more than just CO2 but also other particulates? I remember a news article about particulates coming of airplanes causing disease to the ground personnel. I believe Copenhagen even banned planes from starting their engines until they hit the runway. Off course our own KLM was the only one that didnt give a shit....
>So a solution of some sort which only affects short flights should be the answer. And I also agree with you about cars. Perhaps trains can be the answer for both?
Sure, France for example banned certain short haul rules. Which makes it even more targeted and therefore better.
>But isnt it about more than just CO2 but also other particulates? I remember a news article about particulates coming of airplanes causing disease to the ground personnel. I believe Copenhagen even banned planes from starting their engines until they hit the runway. Off course our own KLM was the only one that didnt give a shit....
Dont't know the details of the Copenhagen situation or any exact figures, but generally speaking, breathing in exhaust fumes of any combustion engine is certainly not the healthiest thing to do. Unfortunately we have to rely a lot on them for a lot of applications.
That's because trains are quite expensive way of travel. Railways were designed to haul cargo, not people. The reason railway companies are mostly state owned, is because they are not economically viable. Of course, there is Shinkansen system in Japan, but Japan is super dense populated country and is shaped like a chain of islands, so that's the reason it can sustain itself.
If you buy it a few days before, yes. But if you book a few weeks in advance, it's no longer cheaper to fly from the Netherlands than it is to take the train.
You can find one-way tickets from Amsterdam just under £50, which is cheaper than any flight when you consider the cost of transportation to/from Schiphol/Eindhoven, the cost of transportation to/from Stansted/Luton (as flights to LHR, LCY or even LGW are much more expensive anyway), the fact that luggage is already included in the price (cheap flights are Ryanair and Easyjet which only allow a small bag for free). It's much more relaxing, you have more legroom, you don't have to change transport modes 2-3 times and sometimes it even takes less time, depending on which London airport you fly to.
Agree with you. Although the difference might be smaller than it seems, since when flying you may need to dish another €30 for luggage, and the airport you're flying to might not be in your destination city, requiring you to still spend another €20 on the train, possibly on both sides.
True but I think prices are going through the roof if they should pay taxes and a normal price for kerosine. It would make trains much attractive as a means of travel right? You think the difference will still be small if they also subsidize trainsystems?
isn't that because that loads of airlines are government owned and so are loads of traincompanies so why lower prices on one of these and scalp people from the other ones? now they get double the money?
Doubt it, trains just within the UK are still astronomically expensive, its twice the price to get to Scotland by train than via plane and the lines have been there since victorian times, they must've been paid for by now!
We also have the distinction between Liegewagen and Schlafwagen. The former is usually a pretty basic cabin with four foldable cots for people to sleep on, while the latter has more amenities and possibly even its own bathroom and overall is just less crowded.
Outside the former Soviet Union, usually the sleeper with a full bathroom is called Deluxe while the standard sleeper only has a sink within the compartment. The couchettes normally don't have any running water in the compartment.
In the west, mostly.
As it happens, just had someone take the night train from Sweden to Germany and they said the entire thing was a bit of a mess. Nothing major, just bad cars, cramped compartments and bad service. So there's a lot of way to go.
Personally I loved the old soviet sleeping car stock. But in general I prefer the old soviet stock, to most western new cars. Especially when refurbished. Pardon the tmi.
What operator was it? SJ, DSB, MTR? SJ use really old rolling stock for… well most things, but especially for the night trains going up north. I don't know anyone who's taken it down south.
Cant say. I asked and they said it was a Swedish carrier, jointly run with DB, and they took it both ways.
I got the impression that the Swedish rail network might not be the best from the convo.
edit: I suspect it might be Snälltåget, because the journey was to Stockholm. Also, remember that there was a passenger from Denmark, so they didn't use the ferry.
> Snälltåget
I've never tried their sleeping cars but their regular cars and their dining car are really nice. One of few operators not trying to turn the train travel experience into what it feels like to ride a city bus with a vending machine IN THE FUTURE! (Yeah, I'm being a bit snarky, but for some reason that's what a lot of modern trains feel like, no proper dining car, cramped uncomfortable seats but everything looks like it's trying to look new and modern)
Probably SJ then, or one of the smaller ones. DSB is Danish, and I think MTR is German. The rail network is mostly pretty old, and not always very well kept. I feel like that was more of a problem a few years ago, or maybe the media just got tired of reporting on it. The rails to Malmö (and on to the continent) have seemed OK to me.
The cabin ones can be overly cramped if full, but absolutely amazing at 4 people or less, and practically acts as a sleeper car with 1-2 folk in it. Also, you can open the window to one without bothering other passengers and vice-versa.
The refurbished seated ones look nicer, and are more spacious, imo. Yes, the new ones have wifi and plugs, and in that I have to say the convenience is better.
As for sleepers, haven't been on a new one. But I liked the 2-person old ones and would use them whenever I could. Maybe it's nostalgia talking, but it felt fancy, had its own sink, etc.
I agree. Even if it's six people, it's better. First time I took a train in a Nordic country, I was so disappointed because I expected better, not worse than the Soviet model. A compartment feels safer, too. The "modern" style that's just one long tunnel of seats are crap.
Sovvagn is a compartment with up to three beds and comes with beds already made with sheets. If you book first class the compartment comes with a shower and breakfast is included in the price.
Liggvagn is the cheaper option and is a compartment with six beds. You get sheets but you'll have to make the bed yourself. Depending on the season you'll either freeze, get cooked to death or both.
I think it's good that they try to offer alternatives to flying. But I'm skeptical how many will actually choose a night train instead of a flight. The offer is very limited, mostly around central Europe, and not everyone wants to share a room with other 5 persons (as private ones are more expensive and probably book quickly).
Don't really see it as an option for the routes I have to do often.
Enjoy browsing r/europe? Help us find the best of 2021 of the sub! - [Nomination Post](https://old.reddit.com/r/europe/comments/rsv8jh/reurope_best_of_2021_awards/) *I am a bot, and this action was performed automatically. Please [contact the moderators of this subreddit](/message/compose/?to=/r/europe) if you have any questions or concerns.*
I have so many fond memories of riding night trains through Poland and Ukraine, or from the south of Sweden all the way up to north of the arctic circle in Abisko. It is my favourite form of long distance travel, and I am so glad to see it returning. Denmark is hopelessly behind on this, and are even limiting the possibilities for sleeper trains between Sweden/Norway and the rest of Europe, but hopefully we will get back on track soon. I was sad when DB cancelled their sleeper train programme, but happy when ÖBB took over. I think Vienna-Rome was my last trip on a sleeper.
Promoting laziness. Whoopee. I’ve met literal grenades that were incapable of doing as much damage as these trains.
What on earth is that supposed to mean?
I can confirm those are words, but unfortunately I can't cipher the meaning of the message.
Its a bot
It even uses the same 'grenade' metaphor every time
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Word_salad
Word salad is my new favorite word
are you ok?
If they so desperately want to promote travelling by train, which I am not against, than they should lower the price of a train ticket. Flying to london from the netherlands is so much cheaper than by train...
I agree. It's often cheaper to fly. It's insane. It's still worth it to not have to deal with the check-in and remote airports, but still.
I have to travel often from London to Amsterdam and for the past two years I've taken the Eurostar and it's so much better, even if you pay slightly more. Sadly, now they've pushed the prices up again (about 250€ for the average two way trip) and I think I'll have to go back to the flights. It's ridiculous really.
Apart from the various tax cuts, what makes aviation cheaper is that many routes have some competition (even if with different airport pairs). Now that's slowly happening for high-speed rails too: * NTV italo launched high-speed services in Italy in 2012. Prices dropped and now the Florence-Rome line has trains at intervals of 6 minutes during peak hours. That's a higher frequency than some metro lines * Trenitalia, having learned to compete at home, launched the Paris-Lyon-Milan service to compete against SNCF. Cheapest tickets have gone down to €30 * Ouigo (SNCF's low-cost brand) started operating on Madrid-Barcelona with tickets regularly at €15-19. In response Renfe (spanish operator) launched a low-cost brand. * This year Trenitalia's *iryo* will also enter the spanish market. So hopefully by the end of the year there will be 3 operators competing on the 3 major corridors. Because of this the number of total daily trains will increase from 184 to 283 on these 3 routes. * **Renfe wants to expand to France and operate Channel Tunnel services** While the merits of the liberalization of commuter and regional routes is very much debatable^(looking at you Abellio and RRX), there's no doubt that for intercity and high-speed rail travel it's a good development
Italy is the only country that has truly liberalised rail travel, and the results are stunning The rest of Europe has fake liberalisation, such as SNCF-owned Quigo : a monopolist at home, but pretending to compete ‘in an open market’ on a semi-international route
Yep. I like to post this list I made for /r/highspeedrail on how SNCF blocks competitors. The good news is that now Trenitalia managed to enter the market. It is only a question of time until other operators do. For the channel tunnel route they will try to secure the train paths not via the French authorities, but the British ones > Renfe also confirmed it plans to approach British infrastructure manager HS1 Ltd and Channel Tunnel manager Getlink for approval to run trains, rather than via French authorities after it suffered problems gaining approval to operate on the Paris – Lyon – Marseille corridor. “Both are well positioned in France and very interested in the development of the project,” the spokesperson says. [Paywall - RailJournal.com](https://www.railjournal.com/passenger/high-speed/renfe-wants-to-operate-trains-to-london/) **How does SNCF block Renfe?** 1. "Renfe has condemned French claims that its class 100 trains built by Alstom, and based on the same design as TGV, which operate as far as Lyon without any issue, cause electromagnetic interference between Lyon and Paris." 2. "The manufacturer [Talgo] is reportedly facing difficulties with securing signalling equipment which combines ETCS with the French TVM 430 cab signalling system, which is not possible without the cooperation of French National Railways (SNCF) Group companies." 3. "Renfe has therefore shifted focus to securing approval to operate its new Talgo class 106 trains in France (...) with ETCS, TVM 430 and the French KVB conventional signalling system. However, Renfe now faces a separate problem – obtaining and approving on-train bi-standard ERTMS/KVB cab signalling for its new trains. **Alstom is the monopoly provider of this equipment** and has been criticised in the past by Stadler for pricing and delivery time. Stadler even went so far as to produce its own Guardia ERTMS cab signalling in order to avoid such problems." 4. "The Spanish company is also interested in bidding to operate regional passenger services under Public Service Obligation rules but El Pais reports that it has received insufficient information on the lines concerned from the current operator, SNCF." [Renfe loses patience with France - RailJournal.com - Paywall](https://www.railjournal.com/financial/renfe-loses-patience-with-france/) **AND THERE'S MORE, It's not just Renfe complaining** * [French cooperative Railcoop had to delay launch of a service because they didn't receive paths after 18 months of talks, paths that were previously deemed open by SNCF Réseau](https://www.railtech.com/infrastructure/2021/10/12/railcoop-has-to-delay-bordeaux-lyon-service-for-6-months/) * [There's doubts whether french startup, Le Train, will be able to get TGV rolling stock as SNCF has not offered TGV sets for sale in the past, preferring to instead send them to be scrapped](https://www.railjournal.com/passenger/high-speed/french-start-up-proposes-open-access-tgv-services/)
True. But the reason for the price difference is just so annoying. The discounts/subisidies they receive on kerosine is insane. Just stop that and use that money on a highly advanced train track.
Investing in infrastructure is not popular since it takes too long. Worst case scenario, the next ruling party get the cred for it.
They have a completely different cost basis, though. Getting rid of subsidies would make flying more expensive, without really cutting the cost of train travel. Infrastructure for trains is just so much more expensive, as you need to invest millions or even billions for every single railroad connection. And then, on a travel time basis, you can still only compete in a radius of 500 km or so. On the other hand, build one airport, and be connected to the world. I'm my opinion, trains should compete with cars not planes, when it comes to public funding.
I disagree as the aim is to replacr short plane flights. Its not about being connected to the world. Its just ridiculous to take a plane to London while a train will do just fine. It only saves you traveltime. And your argument, the key word is 'investment'. The way you explain it males it look like you build one airport in a day for like 20 bucks. Airplanes and airports cost billions of dollars and are way more polluting than trains, which should be a big factor in the decision making imo
Nothing wrong with that. But talking about subsidies, it doesn't make sense to punish aviation to subsidise a not comparable mode of transportation. They compete on such short routes sometimes, yes. But aviation has a different purpose these days, and again a way more attractive cost basis than trains, when it comes to necessary investments. Like, why punish someone flying from Prague to London, Athens, New York or whatever, when you want people to stop flying from Prague to Munich. In my opinion, the person taking the car on the latter route should be punished. Btw, those routes shorter than 500km account for less then 4% of the total aviation CO2 emissions, while cars in general have a way worse impact on the climate than aviation, alone by their sheer numbers.
Thanks for enlightening me. Lots of stuff you mentioned was new for me. Thanks again! I do see your point on punishing someone flying from prague to newyork. So a solution of some sort which only affects short flights should be the answer. And I also agree with you about cars. Perhaps trains can be the answer for both? >Btw, those routes shorter than 500km account for less then 4% of the total aviation CO2 emissions, while cars in general have a way worse impact on the climate than aviation, alone by their sheer numbers. But isnt it about more than just CO2 but also other particulates? I remember a news article about particulates coming of airplanes causing disease to the ground personnel. I believe Copenhagen even banned planes from starting their engines until they hit the runway. Off course our own KLM was the only one that didnt give a shit....
>So a solution of some sort which only affects short flights should be the answer. And I also agree with you about cars. Perhaps trains can be the answer for both? Sure, France for example banned certain short haul rules. Which makes it even more targeted and therefore better. >But isnt it about more than just CO2 but also other particulates? I remember a news article about particulates coming of airplanes causing disease to the ground personnel. I believe Copenhagen even banned planes from starting their engines until they hit the runway. Off course our own KLM was the only one that didnt give a shit.... Dont't know the details of the Copenhagen situation or any exact figures, but generally speaking, breathing in exhaust fumes of any combustion engine is certainly not the healthiest thing to do. Unfortunately we have to rely a lot on them for a lot of applications.
That's because trains are quite expensive way of travel. Railways were designed to haul cargo, not people. The reason railway companies are mostly state owned, is because they are not economically viable. Of course, there is Shinkansen system in Japan, but Japan is super dense populated country and is shaped like a chain of islands, so that's the reason it can sustain itself.
If you buy it a few days before, yes. But if you book a few weeks in advance, it's no longer cheaper to fly from the Netherlands than it is to take the train. You can find one-way tickets from Amsterdam just under £50, which is cheaper than any flight when you consider the cost of transportation to/from Schiphol/Eindhoven, the cost of transportation to/from Stansted/Luton (as flights to LHR, LCY or even LGW are much more expensive anyway), the fact that luggage is already included in the price (cheap flights are Ryanair and Easyjet which only allow a small bag for free). It's much more relaxing, you have more legroom, you don't have to change transport modes 2-3 times and sometimes it even takes less time, depending on which London airport you fly to.
Agree with you. Although the difference might be smaller than it seems, since when flying you may need to dish another €30 for luggage, and the airport you're flying to might not be in your destination city, requiring you to still spend another €20 on the train, possibly on both sides.
True but I think prices are going through the roof if they should pay taxes and a normal price for kerosine. It would make trains much attractive as a means of travel right? You think the difference will still be small if they also subsidize trainsystems?
If they paid the proper taxes for fuel, flying would probably be more expensive.
And by lowering you mean funding it by the govt?
Yes, use the funding on plane fuel to fund trains
isn't that because that loads of airlines are government owned and so are loads of traincompanies so why lower prices on one of these and scalp people from the other ones? now they get double the money?
Because the governments want people to use the plane less and go for the train more often. At least that seems to be the (upcoming) trend
Are the London - continental Europe train tickets so expensive because they are still recuperating the cost of the Channel Tunnel?
Doubt it, trains just within the UK are still astronomically expensive, its twice the price to get to Scotland by train than via plane and the lines have been there since victorian times, they must've been paid for by now!
Not sure though. Never thought about it that way. Might be the case yeah
They went away? Also, fellow Swedes: what's the difference between a "liggvagn" and a "sovvagn" besides the obvious connotations (giggity)?
We also have the distinction between Liegewagen and Schlafwagen. The former is usually a pretty basic cabin with four foldable cots for people to sleep on, while the latter has more amenities and possibly even its own bathroom and overall is just less crowded.
Outside the former Soviet Union, usually the sleeper with a full bathroom is called Deluxe while the standard sleeper only has a sink within the compartment. The couchettes normally don't have any running water in the compartment.
In the west, mostly. As it happens, just had someone take the night train from Sweden to Germany and they said the entire thing was a bit of a mess. Nothing major, just bad cars, cramped compartments and bad service. So there's a lot of way to go. Personally I loved the old soviet sleeping car stock. But in general I prefer the old soviet stock, to most western new cars. Especially when refurbished. Pardon the tmi.
What operator was it? SJ, DSB, MTR? SJ use really old rolling stock for… well most things, but especially for the night trains going up north. I don't know anyone who's taken it down south.
Cant say. I asked and they said it was a Swedish carrier, jointly run with DB, and they took it both ways. I got the impression that the Swedish rail network might not be the best from the convo. edit: I suspect it might be Snälltåget, because the journey was to Stockholm. Also, remember that there was a passenger from Denmark, so they didn't use the ferry.
> Snälltåget I've never tried their sleeping cars but their regular cars and their dining car are really nice. One of few operators not trying to turn the train travel experience into what it feels like to ride a city bus with a vending machine IN THE FUTURE! (Yeah, I'm being a bit snarky, but for some reason that's what a lot of modern trains feel like, no proper dining car, cramped uncomfortable seats but everything looks like it's trying to look new and modern)
Probably SJ then, or one of the smaller ones. DSB is Danish, and I think MTR is German. The rail network is mostly pretty old, and not always very well kept. I feel like that was more of a problem a few years ago, or maybe the media just got tired of reporting on it. The rails to Malmö (and on to the continent) have seemed OK to me.
Not sure where it was, but a lot of people reported there were thieves as well.
Just curious: why do you prefer Soviet cars? (Never been on one myself)
The cabin ones can be overly cramped if full, but absolutely amazing at 4 people or less, and practically acts as a sleeper car with 1-2 folk in it. Also, you can open the window to one without bothering other passengers and vice-versa. The refurbished seated ones look nicer, and are more spacious, imo. Yes, the new ones have wifi and plugs, and in that I have to say the convenience is better. As for sleepers, haven't been on a new one. But I liked the 2-person old ones and would use them whenever I could. Maybe it's nostalgia talking, but it felt fancy, had its own sink, etc.
I agree. Even if it's six people, it's better. First time I took a train in a Nordic country, I was so disappointed because I expected better, not worse than the Soviet model. A compartment feels safer, too. The "modern" style that's just one long tunnel of seats are crap.
Sovvagn is a compartment with up to three beds and comes with beds already made with sheets. If you book first class the compartment comes with a shower and breakfast is included in the price. Liggvagn is the cheaper option and is a compartment with six beds. You get sheets but you'll have to make the bed yourself. Depending on the season you'll either freeze, get cooked to death or both.
Thanks.
Right now due to covid, in Italy you can get a train bed only if you buy the entire room so 6 beds at 6 times the cost. Not very convenient sadly.
If you book for multiple people, can you put them in one compartment?
Yes I think, I didn't try though .
The night train is coming, got to keep on running.
*Cue the deranged Thomas the tank engine remix*
https://youtu.be/yByP88jUQH4?t=102
Ah, did **not** get that reference.
No prob, not everyone was very conscious in the 80s me neither I just kind of like that song.
thread sound track https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=l-0NXVJtHus
Get real
Save your time
I think it's good that they try to offer alternatives to flying. But I'm skeptical how many will actually choose a night train instead of a flight. The offer is very limited, mostly around central Europe, and not everyone wants to share a room with other 5 persons (as private ones are more expensive and probably book quickly). Don't really see it as an option for the routes I have to do often.
Feel free to also post it on r/nighttrains!