Planemaker From Tuvalu, joined Aug 2003, 5697 posts, RR: 34 Posted (7 years 9 months 6 days ago) and read 3372 times:
On Feb. 27th SNCF kicked off festivities to celebrate the 25th anniversary of the TGV and the first TGV route from Paris to Lyon.
What will not be celebrated is the subsequent death of domestic air service between those two cities. An interesting point is that fuel costs are only about 7% of TGV's total costs and, unlike air carriers, is supplied by nuclear energy. Although air fares have dropped in Europe due to LCCs, in the future, rising oil prices will put airlines at an increasing competitive disadvantage
During the first year of service, the TGV cut train travel time between Paris and Lyon from over 5 hours to just 2 hours, and had only 13 return trips. Today there are currently 48 return trips between Paris and Lyon and the TGV has grown to a network of over 1,500 km and 60 destinations, with trains running up to 320 km/h.
FlySSC From France, joined Aug 2003, 7353 posts, RR: 58 Reply 2, posted (7 years 9 months 6 days ago) and read 3345 times:
Quoting Jpj777 (Reply 1): Has there been any decrease in air service on any other TGV route like Paris - Brussels?
Paris - London.
And most of the French domestic routes where the TGV runs (ride < 3h30)
Like Paris - Bordeaux/Nantes/Marseille/Grenoble/Avignon/Nîmes and soon Paris- Strasbourg.
Some cities like GNB (Grenoble) and FNI (Nîmes) are even not served anymore by AF.
Mbm3 From United States of America, joined Jul 2005, 802 posts, RR: 1 Reply 4, posted (7 years 9 months 6 days ago) and read 3300 times:
I love taking the TGV when I am in France. It is much less stressful and often less time consuming than running to the airport and catching a flight (except for maybe Nice). Beyond the sheer coolness of the technology involved to get a train to go that fast, I enjoy relaxing and watching the countryside.
I have to think air travel from Paris to Brussels has been significantly reduced thanks to the Thalys high speed link.
Let Me Tell You, Landing A 772ER Is Harder Than It Looks!
LTBEWR From United States of America, joined Jan 2004, 12671 posts, RR: 13 Reply 6, posted (7 years 9 months 5 days 23 hours ago) and read 3242 times:
I have taken that TVG route round trip back in 1997. It is amazing to go as fast as 310 Kms/hour and 240 Kms/hour average between those two cities. As one doesn't have to go to/from the airport, airport security, if going from city center to city center, it is a lot quicker than an airline for such distances. You also don't have to be strapped in all the time, you can go to the toilet any time you want, there is more room in the seat areas and you can eat when you want. It's too bad we cannot have such fast services in the Northeast corrodor line (Boston/NYC/Phildelphia/Baltimore/Washington DC) instead of having to use airlines or drive for such short trips .
Joost From Netherlands, joined Apr 2005, 3138 posts, RR: 4 Reply 7, posted (7 years 9 months 5 days 23 hours ago) and read 3241 times:
Quoting Jpj777 (Reply 1): Has there been any decrease in air service on any other TGV route like Paris - Brussels?
Paris-Brussels by air travel was ceased totally for a few years and now there is one daily SN flight for connections, that's it. Also, BER-HAM air service has been ceased IIRC.
Why whould you fly if the train does it in a little more than one hour?
I wonder what will happen to routes like BCN-MAD, LIN-FCO and AMS-BRU once the high-speed rail-links are ready.
Quoting AJO (Reply 3): What would have been the price for a TGV ticket had there not been subsidies in building the railways and funding the SNCF?
Would be higher But also, what would air tickets cost if they would even charge VAT on it? What would all means of transport cost if governmental bodies would be able to monetarize and tax all means of transport to environmental impact, etc. That's hardly impossible. Would you include the chance of a nuclear meltdown in the power use of the TGV? And if yes, how many euros?
I've been reading the analysis of the high-speed railway AMS-BRU. It's very hard to monetarize all kind of impacts.
In the end, it stays a political and thus human decision, emotions included. However, a common shared opinion is that on very dense traffic routes up to 500 km, a hihg-speedtrain is environmentally-socially-economically superior to air travel, for longer distances or less dense traffic routes, an airplane is often they transport mean of choice.
JoFMO From Germany, joined Jul 2004, 2211 posts, RR: 0 Reply 10, posted (7 years 9 months 5 days 10 hours ago) and read 3059 times:
Quoting BA (Reply 9): Spain's AVE is getting the German ICE-3M, an improved version of the ICE-3 that Germany's DB uses.
But Spains first high speed railway between Madrid and Sevilla is operated by French-built TGV trains.
By the way the Madrid-Seville example shows that a high speed railway can also be very succesfull to a smaller city in a less dense populated country even when it is to one of the poorer parts of it.
Well doen Spain!
Planemaker From Tuvalu, joined Aug 2003, 5697 posts, RR: 34 Reply 11, posted (7 years 9 months 5 days 9 hours ago) and read 3022 times:
Quoting JoFMO (Reply 10): But Spains first high speed railway between Madrid and Sevilla is operated by French-built TGV trains.
RENFE is an equal opportunity customer and uses Alsthom, Talgo-Bombardier and Siemens trains on the AVE network. You may not know that RENFE is already doing AVE rail alignment work on the Barcelona to France section.
Nationalism is an infantile disease. It is the measles of mankind. - A. Einstein
BuyantUkhaa From Mongolia, joined May 2004, 2806 posts, RR: 3 Reply 14, posted (7 years 9 months 5 days 7 hours ago) and read 2935 times:
Not a high-speed line, but the opening of the direct AMS-EIN link next Monday will kill the KL service on that route. The link was supposed to have opened last December and KL already dropped the route accordingly, not sure if KL kept it open provisionally for the last three months.
I'd be interested to see what influence the Shinkansen had on pax numbers in Japan...
SparkingWave From South Korea, joined Jun 2005, 668 posts, RR: 0 Reply 16, posted (7 years 9 months 5 days 6 hours ago) and read 2873 times:
The TGV is amazing and deserves every credit for providing an alternative to air travel between Paris and Lyon.
But you've omitted one potential drawback, and that is that rail networks are vulnerable to terrorism, perhaps more so, than travel by air.
In Spain there was a grisly terrorist attack on a train that killed many people. In France there was a scare that the same thing could happen.
Fortunately these attacks are rare so far, but in the future if more people travel by train, it would seem logical to assume that railroads will continue to become tempting targets for terrorists.
If the same security measures go into place to protect passengers in trains as in planes, then any advantage that trains currently have over planes would be removed. Imagine if your luggage had to be screened and X-rayed, if you had to go through background and security checks at all train stations, and the added manpower it would take to inspect all rail lines continuously for bombs...
Fuel for thought,
Flights to the moon and all major space stations. At Pan Am, the sky is no longer the limit!
CptGermany From Germany, joined Feb 2006, 86 posts, RR: 0 Reply 17, posted (7 years 9 months 5 days 3 hours ago) and read 2811 times:
Quoting Vincewy (Reply 8): TGV will only get bigger, France has exported this technology overseas, South Korea has it now, soon China.
In fact, China chose the ICE 3 for the high speed rail network. I read that on German news about two months ago or so. I apologize that I can't provide a link.
I think that high speed rail service will never fully replace short-haul air service because not every passenger on short flights such as Lyon to Paris is O&D. Some actually continue their journey on long-haul flights. In this case, short flights such as the ones mentioned in this discussion make very much sense.
A possible exception to the above is maybe the ICE connection from CGN to FRA. The train takes about 50 minutes and actually stops at the airport train station first before it continues to Frankfurt main station. Hence, Lufthansa offers airport like check-in counters at Cologne main train station.
In general, I believe that high speed trains are inferior because of the environmental impact and the investment necessary sometimes to build the tracks. High speed train tracks require sophisticated and expensive techniques for track planning and building. Especially, in mountainous regions many bridges and tunnels are required. This also affects the enviroment because often the natural shape of the scenery has to be changed. Besides, in densely populated areas the trains often come close to towns and urban areas, which in turn requires noise abatement techniques.
All of the above is well reflected by the ICE track between CGN and FRA. Just one km cost millions for that track mainly because it needed to cross the Siebengebirge, a very hilly and mountainous region. Furthermore, due to the noise abatement walls one can see the scenery for only about 50% of the total trip.
Airports are already there and an airplane does not have such drastic impacts on the environment. In "anti-nuclear-energy" Germany the CO2 emissions produced by the airplane cannot be argued against with the argument of the train because the latter's energy is produced with coal in power plants.
Personally, I enjoy the experience to travel in a high speed train. However, I do not see it as a threat to short-haul flights. Rather I see it as an excellent alternative to the car in Germany specifically.
BuyantUkhaa From Mongolia, joined May 2004, 2806 posts, RR: 3 Reply 21, posted (7 years 9 months 5 days 2 hours ago) and read 2724 times:
Quoting CptGermany (Reply 17): I believe that high speed trains are inferior because of the environmental impact
Hmmmmm that is a rather bold statement. The local environmental impact of an electric train is close to zero (in terms of chemical pollution), and a power plant can be treated more efficiently because all pollution is concentrated, so any mitigation effort will be concentrated as well (e.g. soot filters etc.).
Quoting CptGermany (Reply 17): Besides, in densely populated areas the trains often come close to towns and urban areas, which in turn requires noise abatement techniques.
And planes do not require those? Most planes I know are still noisier at take off than trains.
CptGermany From Germany, joined Feb 2006, 86 posts, RR: 0 Reply 22, posted (7 years 9 months 5 days 1 hour ago) and read 2676 times:
Quoting BuyantUkhaa (Reply 21): The local environmental impact of annelectric train is close to zero (in terms of chemical pollution)
I agree, that is true. However, the preceding impact including track development and manufacture is substantial environmentally. Sometimes, artificial canyons have to be cut into hills in order to build a railway track. Due to their speed, the trains can go uphill only at certain angles and have a limited turning radius.
Quoting BuyantUkhaa (Reply 21): Andnplanes do not require those? Most planes I know are still noisier atntake off than trains.
I agree, planes are much louder at take-off than trains. Nevertheless, a train usually doesn't take-off right next to house, whereas certain railroad tracks here in Germany are literally built next to houses. Besides, high speed trains can be louder than you think. After all, metal railroad wheels are running on metal rails.
LJ From Netherlands, joined Nov 1999, 4326 posts, RR: 0 Reply 23, posted (7 years 9 months 4 days 23 hours ago) and read 2599 times:
Quoting BuyantUkhaa (Reply 14): Not a high-speed line, but the opening of the direct AMS-EIN link next Monday will kill the KL service on that route
The route was already killed in anticpation (the railway should have opened in December but was delayed) and KLM couldn't wait killing it (they wanted to kill it prebviously). The only reason why the kept it open was a) the Philips Skyteam contract and b) the ability to keep the slots at EIN. As AF has taken over the slots last year the didn't have to fly to EIN (if I'm not mistaken only they already axed EIN as of December 2005)
Quoting Joost (Reply 7): I wonder what will happen to routes like BCN-MAD, LIN-FCO and AMS-BRU once the high-speed rail-links are ready.
AMS-BRU (and probably DUS-AMS) will be axed but at least reduced. There is a reason KLM is participating in the joint venture which operates the new high speed link. I thus doubt they have any intention to keep the current flights. between AMS and BRU
Vincewy From Taiwan, joined Oct 2005, 767 posts, RR: 0 Reply 24, posted (7 years 8 months 4 weeks 1 day 23 hours ago) and read 2479 times:
If Western Europe is well connected with High Speed Rails, buses, and other rails, then Airbus's assertion of need for A380 will prevail. From major hubs like FRA, CDG, and LHR, not all passengers will need another flight(s) to connect other cities, instead, it could be rails and even buses. It's much cheaper to arrange it that way, only those heading to another continent or some further cities in Europe will need to connect to another flight.