Posted on 02/16/2023 9:49:16 AM PST by Jeff Chandler
If you ask someone to close their eyes and picture a train, they'll typically imagine one of two things:
The sleek, fast European passenger trains that can zip through the countryside, or The industrial, coal-burning freight trains that powered the American westward expansion. So, how did these two vastly dissimilar pictures come to be? In this article, we'll take a closer look at the key differences between American and European rail systems.
HOW DO EUROPEAN AND NORTH AMERICAN TRAINS DIFFER? When it comes to American trains vs. European trains, there are six main factors that help make each one stand apart: their freight-to-passenger ratio, funding, rail infrastructure, train designs, operating procedures, and government regulations. Let's explore each of these in-depth.
1. Freight-to-Passenger Ratio What really sets these two rail networks apart are the shares of their respective freight and passenger transportation markets. North American railways handle about 84% freight cargo and only 16% passengers, while the European Union's railways are almost exactly the inverse at 80% passengers and 20% freight. This difference in focus is primarily due to their opposing historical priorities: American railways were built to move goods across a vast country with a sparse population, whereas European railways were mostly created to move large amounts of people between densely populated cities. To learn more, check out our recent article on the history of short line railroads in America.
2. Train Design Due to their opposing priorities, American and European trains are designed quite differently. American trains are typically longer and wider to accommodate more freight, while European trains are shorter and narrower to allow for more nimble movements and quicker acceleration. American freight cars also tend to be lower to the ground to make it easier to load and unload heavy cargo, whereas European passenger cars are typically higher off the ground to offer a better view of the passing scenery.
An Italian regional passenger train at a Swiss border station in Chiasso, Switzerland. An Italian regional passenger train at a Swiss border station in Chiasso, Switzerland. 3. Operating Procedures As a result of their different train designs, American and European operating procedures are also quite dissimilar. American trains typically have one powerful locomotive at the front that pulls the entire train (although this is changing thanks to distributed power systems), while European trains often have multiple locomotives that pull the train from the front and push it from behind (or a mix of both). American locomotives also typically run on diesel fuel, whereas European locomotives can run on either diesel or electric power.
4. Rail Infrastructure The American National Rail Network is more than twice the size of the European rail system, with over 224,000 miles (360,000 kilometers) of track compared to Europe's mere 94,000 miles (151,000 kilometers). American railways were also built on a wider gauge (the distance between the rails), which allows for larger and heavier trains. As a result, American freight railways are much more efficient than their European counterparts, carrying almost three times as much cargo per mile of track. The only downside of this wider gauge is that it isn't compatible with Europe's smaller standard gauge, so American trains cannot run on European tracks and vice versa.
5. Funding American railways are primarily privately owned, with freight companies investing their own money into the system. In contrast, most European railways are publicly owned and funded by taxpayers. This has led to very different attitudes towards investment: American companies are more likely to reinvest their profits into the railway system, while European railway companies have been known to be more resistant to private investment and change.
6. Government Regulations American railways are subject to less government regulation than European railways, which gives freight companies more freedom to operate as they see fit. For instance, American freight companies are not required to use their tracks for passenger service (although many still do), whereas European freight companies must share their tracks with passenger trains. American freight companies are also allowed to ship cargo that would typically be banned in Europe, such as crude oil, toxic chemicals, and other hazardous materials.
SO, WHICH COUNTRY HAS THE BEST RAILROAD SYSTEM? Given all of these differences, it's hard to say definitively which country has the better railway system. Ultimately, it comes down to what you're looking for in a railway system. American railways are significantly more efficient and cost-effective at moving freight cargo for businesses, whereas European railways offer a much smoother and more scenic experience for their rail passengers.
Virtually all commercial track in western Europe is standard guage, the same as in the US.
What's that, a 3 hour flight? Hard to get too uncomfortable in a plane if it's only 3 hours. I suppose if you're not in a hurry and want to take a car the train is useful. But if you're flying for a 5-7 day vacation losing two days isn't worth it. So each has it's pros an cons.
Thank you for filling in the blanks.
It’s rather refreshing to read a thread with so little contention!
20% of total rail miles.
Some years ago my family took the trail from Boston to Minneapolis/St. Paul with a change in trains in Chicago.
About six boys from the hood boarded the train in Chicago; they had a couple of roomettes next to ours. The profanity was non stop. The “boys” got off at every stop between Chicago and Minneapolis. We think they were dealing drugs.
About a week or two after our trip (the one and only) we read that there was a shoot out between rival gangs at Union Station Chicago.
One difference not noted is European rail was bombed into nonexistence 80 years ago and has been completely rdbuilt since 1950.
Tabula rasa.
Perhaps, but if that efficiency has been gained by reducing required inspections, slacking off on maintenance, or reducing crew size to unsafe levels then the increase in efficiency is profiting executives and shareholders at everyone else's expense.
It used to be that US companies got bigger by mainly expanding operations. But regulatory strangulation and taxes have made it easier to increase profits by cost-cutting.
Even in California there are flights every 45 to 60 minutes from SFO to LAX, OAK to LAX, SJC to LAX and all the other airports in the LA Area (John Wayne, Burbank, etc). Flights are always on time, are cheap, and fast. There is going to be almost ZERO demand for the “high speed rail” from the Bay Area to the LA Area. Who wants to make 10 to 20 stops between the two areas? And every year, “fast” gets redefined to less fast than the previous year. It’s a $100 billion boondoggle.
Narrow gauge used to be used in lumber camps and trains all over the country. It was easier to get trains to traverse twisty and windy switchbacks in the mountains on the way to the timber harvest.
Everything you said is true - but you miss the point
Its a system that’s WORSE than monopoly. Its an incompetent and bloated Fed.gov monopoly on passenger, but they don’t even control the tracks. Its Marxism, without even owning the means of production!
Let’s just imagine - if we removed the last 100+ years of Fed.gov regulation - that the rail companies were also allowed to run passengers on their own tracks? What if they had complete freedom to set schedules and pricing? Or they could lease the tracks to other private operators - for a cut of the profits?
What would happen?
There a number of on-line articles on European track guage; when you have a few moments, take a look.
OTOH, with the Auto Train, I breeze into the terminal, my car is rolled aboard with all my luggage (without weight limitations) and a pair of bicycles on the back, I simply board the train at 4 p.m. without having to wait in line or take off my shoes and belt. I then enjoy the trip, get off the train after breakfast, and I'm on the way in my own car by 11 a.m. the next morning.
Sure, I lose a little time, but I look forward to the train trip and sleeper car as I have never done for air travel in a long time.
The sum of the differences between the two systems also helps explain why “high speed passenger” rail is seen more often in Europe than in the U.S.
And were it not for that, the U.S. has fewer densly populated city-to-city routes that can warrant (and pay for) “high speed” passenger rail (given cost per mile considerations against expected revenue per mile) than Europe. The “Northeast Corridor” - Boston to Washington D.C. - is about the only route that could make “high speed rail” a profitable proposition.
Who would have guessed that freight and passenger trains are different.
People always ignore the hassle of TSA for flights. Adds lots of time, and the shorter the flight, the bigger percent of time spent on Pat-downs.
Trains you get right on. No extra time for examination and all that BS.
Who wants to stop? All the people going to those points. It doesn’t take long. Most stops are 3 minutes at a platform.
Your pix is like 20 years old, though I really liked those engines.
Thank you.
We buy TSA PRE and usually the TSA inspection takes less than 10 minutes. Especially at Spokane and San Jose that we use most frequently.
Disclaimer: Opinions posted on Free Republic are those of the individual posters and do not necessarily represent the opinion of Free Republic or its management. All materials posted herein are protected by copyright law and the exemption for fair use of copyrighted works.