|
|
Post by Deleted on Sept 27, 2010 9:20:14 GMT
This weekend, Moscow-Nice train service began again after a somewhat lengthy interruption of 96 years (the route had been suspended in 1914). The trip is 3,300 km and lasts 52 hours, with eleven 1st class carriages and one 2nd class carriage. The train stops in 20 stations in Russia, Belarus, Poland, Czechy, Austria, Italy and France.
Russians are the biggest tourist group on the Côte d'Azur (as they were before 1914), representing up to 25% of the clientele in the 5-star hotels. The second biggest group are the visitors from the Middle East.
Anyway, the 1st class fare is 1200€ (with private berth and bathroom including shower), or 300€ in second class.
The SNCF is also hoping to reopen the Saint Petersburg-Nice line that started running in 1864.
|
|
|
|
Post by lagatta on Sept 27, 2010 10:02:45 GMT
Oh that sounds utterly splendid.
I know less posh Russians, students mostly, who have taken the coach (bus) from Moscow or St-Petersburg to Western European cities for events, just a long, long haul. Though I can also recall crossing much of Canada that way when I was young, and it must have been just about as far. No way I'd do that now.
|
|
|
|
Post by bixaorellana on Sept 27, 2010 12:53:13 GMT
That would be an incredible trip. If my calculations are correct, it seems there can't be any lengthy stops built in, so the passengers would remain aboard for the entire journey. It takes 3 more hours to go from Moscow to Nice than it does to go from Nice to Moscow: www.ftnnews.com/content/view/10338/32/ |
|
|
|
Post by onlymark on Sept 27, 2010 13:18:32 GMT
It's due to the prevailing winds for the time difference.
The wind direction over Europe tends to be westerly. That is it travels from west to east. Thus anything moving with the wind, west to east, completes its journey faster than in the opposite direction.
Nice to Moscow is thus faster than Moscow to Nice.
|
|
|
|
Post by Deleted on Sept 27, 2010 13:25:06 GMT
From Bixa's link: The successful candidates underwent a special program with training in French and English language proficiency,psychology, ethics, culture, and servicing passengers. I guess there will be a lot of single matrons on the train.  |
|
|
|
Post by bixaorellana on Sept 27, 2010 13:26:57 GMT
This isn't like that threads-on-the-agave explanation, is it? (Not that I'm afraid to look stupid or gullible or anything.)
Seriously, is that why? I assumed it had to do with terrain sloping up one way and down the other.
|
|
|
|
Post by betsie on Sept 27, 2010 13:27:34 GMT
I guess there'll also be a lot of drunks on the train. No way would I take that journey in such company.
|
|
|
|
Post by onlymark on Sept 27, 2010 13:27:44 GMT
It's common knowledge amongst the British, obviously an island nation that is at the whim of the winds, that going on holiday to the east coast never takes quite as much time as when you decide to go to Wales.
The wind direction in the UK, strange as it seems, also affects journeys north to south (and v.v.). This is exaggerated to a noticeable degree over long distances when if you are travelling north the wind gradually leads you more east.
It has been known many times for southerners, who rarely venture to the north of the country, to set off to go to, say, Liverpool (though why go there I've no idea) and end up in Newcastle as they've not taking in to account the wind.
Those from the north of England, who traditionally have had to travel far and wide for work, get used to factoring this in and have on many times successfully managed to leave Leeds and arrive in London (though why go there I've no idea either) without going too far adrift.
This is why all the great sailors/explorers from the UK have been from the north.
The effete southerners can't cut it.
|
|
|
|
Post by onlymark on Sept 27, 2010 13:34:52 GMT
Seriously, is that why? I assumed it had to do with terrain sloping up one way and down the other. Yeah, right, terrain sloping. So if you go east from France it's all downhill? Even though the French do tend to think that culture everywhere goes downhill when you leave France, no matter in whatever direction, I don't think that is physically true. Otherwise all the Mediterranean Sea would swamp the Lebanon and it would be deeper at that side. No? It can't be true as I've seen pictures people walking on the beach in Beirut. They couldn't do this if it was that deep. |
|
|
|
Post by Deleted on Sept 27, 2010 13:38:43 GMT
|
|
|
|
Post by onlymark on Sept 27, 2010 13:45:59 GMT
I guess K2 has found the flaw in my explanation.
It may well be that the article is wrong and they didn't take into account the time difference. Moscow is a couple of hours ahead of Nice.
|
|
|
|
Post by Deleted on Sept 27, 2010 13:48:59 GMT
Yes, not same time zone at all! Anyway, as an interesting side note, I bet that nobody here knew that the largest Russian Orthodox cathedral outside of Russia is in Nice. I certainly did not.  |
|
|
|
Post by onlymark on Sept 27, 2010 14:11:24 GMT
However, let's work this out.
Currently Moscow is 2 hours ahead of Nice.
Let's assume it all happens on the same day - thus the train leaves Moscow at 16:17 and arrives Nice at 19:12.
Also it leaves Nice at 19:22 and arrives Moscow at 23:17.
Now let's make it a bit easier and ignore the five minutes difference on the hour at each end. Thus the times now become -
Leave Moscow 16:17, arrive Nice 19:17
And -
Leave Nice 19:17, arrive Moscow 23:17
That makes it nice round figures and we can account for the 48 hour extra and the 5 minutes at the end.
So -
leave Moscow 16:17 - this is actually 14:17 in Nice, thus to arrive at 19:17 in Nice we have a travel time of 5 hours. In effect you'd put your watch back two hours whilst on the train like you do on a plane (or at least that's what I do).
However, in the other direction -
leave Nice at 19:17 - this is actually 21:17 in Moscow, thus to arrive at 23:17 we only have a journey time of 2 hours.
If you add on the 48 hours to both you get a journey time of 53 hours Moscow to Nice and 50 hours Nice to Moscow (I'm now ignoring the 5 minutes to illustrate the point as this is a minor complication)
Ergo - there is a three hours difference in journey time one way to the other.
So unless you can fault my maths - I told you it was the wind.
|
|
|
|
Post by Deleted on Sept 27, 2010 14:30:19 GMT
|
|
|
|
Post by onlymark on Sept 27, 2010 14:43:23 GMT
Is that because of the pedantic maths or the flights of fancy?
Probably I don't want to know the answer to that.
|
|
|
|
Post by bixaorellana on Sept 27, 2010 14:55:40 GMT
When I said sloping terrain, of course I didn't mean that it would slope consistently over the entire route. Factor in enough steep hills, and a trip lasting more than two days could easily accumulate an extra three hours in the direction with more upslopes.
|
|
|
|
Post by onlymark on Sept 27, 2010 15:47:21 GMT
bixa, the hills could well be a factor, I was just being facetious, sorry.
But my sense would say there isn't enough of them to account for the difference.
However, what would account is the length of time of stops.
So, being the terrier that I am where travel is concerned, I went and added up all the stops on the timetable from the Russian train company.
Nice to Moscow (the 'faster' train) the length of time of the stops totals 7 hours 50 minutes.
Moscow to Nice, total stoppage 10 hours 10 minutes.
(Both figures rounded by 1 minute to make for easy calculation)
So that's a difference of 2 hours 20 minutes.
If there was an original difference of 3 hours then the new difference is down to 40 minutes.
Now over that distance there are many factors that could account for it, definitely the terrain for one.
I'm now exhausted and require re-filling with water before I can steam off to other things.
|
|
|
|
Post by bixaorellana on Sept 27, 2010 16:25:29 GMT
Okay! I wasn't standing my ground (or rolling down its slope) to be stubborn, I was genuinely curious. This information is deeply pleasing.
Please, have a beer -- on me!
|
|
|
|
Post by Jazz on Sept 27, 2010 18:08:35 GMT
Oh my god, I would love to take this trip! ...am trying to imagine (and failing) to think of being homeschooled by Mark, Is that because of the pedantic maths or the flights of fancy? Probably I don't want to know the answer to that. It's the pedantic maths. ;D |
|
|
|
Post by onlymark on Sept 27, 2010 18:41:27 GMT
Just think where you'd be without pedantic maths.
You'd still be living in caves being dragged around by your hair, trying to work out how to divide up your woolly mammoth between a family of seven.
|
|
|
|
Post by Jazz on Sept 27, 2010 18:43:40 GMT
I would not!
|
|
|
|
Post by gertie on Oct 6, 2010 17:21:13 GMT
That sounds like a cool train trip.
|
|
|
|
Post by bjd on Oct 6, 2010 19:24:17 GMT
Chipping in here a little late, but I must admit that after reading answer #2, my first snappy answer was, "it's the tailwinds". Unfortunately, I saw that onlyMark had beat me to it.
|
|
|
|
Post by Deleted on Oct 6, 2010 19:57:43 GMT
I would certainly be happy to do a trip like that if I had the opportunity. I wonder if it runs even through the winter.
|
|
|
|
Post by hwinpp on Oct 7, 2010 4:21:48 GMT
I just read Moscow- nice by train.
|
|
|
|
Post by Deleted on Oct 7, 2010 9:26:08 GMT
Very nice, I'm sure.
|
|
|
|
Post by BigIain on Oct 7, 2010 15:45:55 GMT
Yes, not same time zone at all! Anyway, as an interesting side note, I bet that nobody here knew that the largest Russian Orthodox cathedral outside of Russia is in Nice. I certainly did not. Oh, me.... ME!!! I knew that. And I know that its very difficult to find on foot too, up behind the Gare SNCF. |
|
