I'm not sure what "Wait at location because there was no better train" means?
Are you massuming a 3h40m trip for a specific time-based appointment? I think the use case of this kind of train is more similar to a flight with one or more nights at destination, so that the specific arrival time is not that important.
> I think the use case of this kind of train is more similar to a flight with one or more nights at destination, so that the specific arrival time is not that important.
OP was explicitly comparing car and trains, not flight and trains.
If that's the case, then we are more in the context of a "city trip", and Hamburg -> Berlin might not be the most representative case. Something along the line of Hamburg -> Rome is more accurate as people usually like more change of scenery. Flight from Hamburg to Rome is 2:20 and train is 19 hours. Even accounting for airport wait time, the difference is ridiculous.
The issue for passenger transport with rails is that it's not good for small distances as cars have the advantage because of the added convince/flexibility, and for long distances, flight is better due to speed.
For freight, however, train is amazing as these extra hours don't matter too much and the reduction in emissions is massive. The issue is that there aren't that many dedicated cargo flights. Most cargo revenue come from transporting freight in the holds of passenger jets. So moving cargo from flights to trains does not lead to a direct reduction in CO2 emission since those planes are going to fly anyway.
> Most cargo revenue come from transporting freight in the holds of passenger jets.
Is this really true? DHL, FedEx, and UPS (and Amazon?) all operate their own freight aircraft. There are also contract freight operators. Most major airports have an entire area that is exclusively for freight operations.
Yes some freight does go in the holds of passenger jets, but is it "most" or even close?
Yes, and during the pandemic when passenger traffic cratered passenger airlines started putting additional cargo in the passenger cabin. China started cracking down on that recently though (unsure why). Freight is generally far more profitable than passengers.
This comparison (Hamburg to Rome) is silly. The thread is about the 9€ ticket, which is only valid on regional trains in Germany and the point is to save money for consumers and save the environment by replacing car journeys with train journeys. Bringing in a red herring like a cross-country trip helps no one.
OTOH, you make it seem like it's super easy to find (free?) parking anywhere near your destination, I'd guess the unknowns about that even out with the blanket assumption of '1 hour to get wherever you wanted to really be'.
Let’s say you have an appointment at location 15 minutes away from train station at 9:00 and your train arrives at 7:45. You will have to wait for 1 hour and probably spend this time unproductively and maybe even at extra cost (e.g. you choose to get a cup of coffee and a sandwich in a restaurant nearby).
Yeah, if you plan your appointment at a place 300km away willy nilly without checking the train schedule and if you plan your car drive in a way that you dont plan for any congestions leaving Hamburg, on the Autobahn, entering Berlin (good luck!), then yeah: The car is more expensive, more tiring, and slower. But get this: Instead of having an hour you can spend at your destination to your liking, you get to use that extra hour driving your car! Congratulations!
Sorry but that has to be the most contrived and ridicilous statement I've ever read. And this is coming from someone -- me -- who owns two cars, lives in Berlin and practically never uses public transportation.
In many cases you are absolutely right, the appointment times can be adjusted according to train schedule, destinations are nice places where you can find something to do in between etc. Public transportation in Germany in most cases is better than cars (I do not even have driving license for that reason - never needed it). Still, the calculation logic is right: when you travel somewhere to be there at certain time, you need to include some buffers in your planning, both for trains and for cars. Every 4th train in Germany arrives with delays and not every appointment can be planned for your convenience.
If I have an appointment, I'll rather take the train, be rested and have enough time in the train to prepare for the meeting. all the trains have wifi and power.
In Germany the trains are also faster than cars on the Autobahn, even if I theoretically could drive 180km/h. All my travels from Dresden to Berlin, Leipzig or Frankfurt are faster by train than by car. ICE only.
Now with this offer, the slow RE trains only, it's slower than by car, but still more attractive. Just if I have a meeting far outside a big town, and bad connections (say the bus only goes every 30min) and I have to walk 10min, I'll take the car. For my next travel to the Leipzig Kanupark I'll take the car, but all other business and leisure trips are by train. For the last 3 years already.
> even at extra cost (e.g. you choose to get a cup of coffee and a sandwich in a restaurant nearby).
That's the pessimist's view. The optimist wanders around and randomly finds a place they would never have found otherwise. I mostly do the first. Sometimes I find something truly interesting. Sometimes not, but I don't think the unproductivity you mention has harmed me. (Yes, occasionally I absolutely have to hack something, so I search the first place where I can use my laptop. But I try to avoid that in all but the most familiar cities.)
1. Such train may not exist.
2. Train at more convenient time could be fully booked.
3. Train at more convenient time could be significantly more expensive.
Are you massuming a 3h40m trip for a specific time-based appointment? I think the use case of this kind of train is more similar to a flight with one or more nights at destination, so that the specific arrival time is not that important.