BrightCedars From Belgium, joined Nov 2004, 1288 posts, RR: 2 Posted (9 years 9 months 1 week 1 day 2 hours ago) and read 2109 times:
A few years ago AF decided to go hand in hand with 2H and drop its CDG-BRU flights in favor of ZYR-CDG high-speed trains. Check-in (or so) is offered at ZYR but you still have to transfer your luggage yourself at CDG and hence line up in the queues there.
Now AF has acquired KL and a similar option could be envisaged to replace KL's AMS-BRU flights with a ZYR-AMS (maybe pending the inauguration of a shorter travel time between the two stations which currently stands at 2h40 compared to 1h15 on ZYR-CDG). AF's existing agreement with 2H may make the thing easier for a deal with its KL part.
Imagine AF and KL both having a high-speed train link between ZYR and their respective home airports, providing countless connections to their network and eventually sharing that advantage with their SkyTeam partners. You could see a CO, DL, KE, MEA, NW tag on any of these train services (alongside AF & KL) that would boost those airlines' offer and visibility on the market but could be a serious blow to the airport's ambitions, whichever they may be.
SN has recently inaugurated its high-speed train service between BRU and XPG to cater for Africans in the Paris area but this offer is in no way a threat to CDG compared to what the above fiction would mean for BRU.
I believe that this is a unique situation in the world today. Do you think it is normal that a specific carrier/alliance be given such a competitive edge over the local airport and its operators?
JoFMO From Germany, joined Jul 2004, 2211 posts, RR: 0
Reply 3, posted (9 years 9 months 1 week 22 hours ago) and read 1957 times:
I makes me wonder that AF did this between Brussel and Paris and is considering it now also for the Amsterdam route. It sounds not very comfortable if I have to recheck my luggage at Cologne.
In contrast LH also has its code on the train to Cologne and Stuttgart from FRA, but get your boarding card and have custums at the station, so that it is really flying on altitude 0. And also LH has 16 train-flights to CGN while AF only has 5 to Brussel. But even under that more comfortabe conditions LH didn't give up it's flights completely.
So I wonder that it seems to be working for AF to abandon all flights, while is more comfortable with offering both options.
Are there serious plans for AF to make it's trains real flight-like?
BrightCedars From Belgium, joined Nov 2004, 1288 posts, RR: 2
Reply 4, posted (9 years 9 months 1 week 21 hours ago) and read 1923 times:
There are weapons in business and these are the main disadvantages of inter-modality for BRU in this case. We didn't list the advantages and the possibilities the other way round if a comparable offer was available.
On a side note I can just imagine a whole new different product based at BRU like an intercontinental hub of long-haul premium only flights. BRU certainly has room to offer such a thing while those around wouldn't have the capacity to support both current and such operations and making it comfortable for the targeted highly attractive and sensitive executive customers.