Sponsor Message:
Civil Aviation Forum
My Starred Topics | Profile | New Topic | Forum Index | Help | Search 
Air France To Operate AGV (High Speed Train)  
User currently offlineFlySSC From United States of America, joined Aug 2003, 7412 posts, RR: 57
Posted (6 years 7 months 2 weeks 1 day 1 hour ago) and read 13273 times:

Following the presentation by Alsthom of the next generation of TGV-High speed train called AGV (Automotrice Grande Vitesse), Air France-KLM is said to be interested in acquiring/leasing 4 for them to start high speed train services between CDG Airport and AMS Schipol via BRU, starting 2010.

In 2010, the monopoly of the French National Railways Company (SNCF) on international services will end (and in 2017 for Domestic services).

Those trains would wear the Air France livery and could be leased and operated via a subsidiary company.

At the average speed of 360 km/h, the journey between Schipol and CDG would take 1h30.
The special high speed tracks are already operational to BRU and the last portion to AMS will be opened by the end of this year.



In French only : http://www.europe1.fr/informations/a...it-prendre-de-vitesse-la-sncf.html

35 replies: All unread, showing first 25:
 
User currently onlineHumberside From United Kingdom, joined Dec 2005, 4920 posts, RR: 4
Reply 1, posted (6 years 7 months 2 weeks 1 day 1 hour ago) and read 13216 times:

How long before CDG-St Pancras (London). Its a much needed service IMO and I ca think of much better uses for slots at LHR than flights to CDG that can be replaced with high speed train service

Obviously high speed rail to LHR as well would be best, but the a St Pancras-CDG service would be better than nothing

[Edited 2008-02-07 09:54:51]


Visit the Air Humberside Website and Forum
User currently offlineJoost From Netherlands, joined Apr 2005, 3169 posts, RR: 4
Reply 2, posted (6 years 7 months 2 weeks 1 day ago) and read 13031 times:



Quoting FlySSC (Thread starter):
At the average speed of 360 km/h, the journey between Schipol and CDG would take 1h30.

They will never be able to make it in 1h30.

Although the trains will technically be able to reach 360 km/h, the track from Paris to Schiphol does not allow these speeds. There are also many parts of the track that are existing tracks, not high-speed, like:
Schiphol-Hoofddorp: 140 km/h (4 km, existing track)
Hoofddorp-Rotterdam: 300 km/h (only 15km)
Rotterdam-Lombarijden: 140 km/h (7km, existing track)
Lombardijen-Antwerpen: 300 km/h (37 km)
Antwerpen-Brussels: 160 km/h (existing track)


User currently offlineVarig md-11 From France, joined Jul 2000, 1597 posts, RR: 7
Reply 3, posted (6 years 7 months 2 weeks 23 hours ago) and read 13004 times:



Quoting FlySSC (Thread starter):
At the average speed of 360 km/h, the journey between Schipol and CDG would take 1h30.
The special high speed tracks are already operational to BRU and the last portion to AMS will be opened by the end of this year.

After Antwerp the line will be shared by Thalys (Belgian,French,Dutch alliance) NS Hi-Speed (Dutch service from BRU to AMS), now AF and then maybe VS and others

if you want my 2 cents the trains will know as many delays as the planes: 3 completely different machine types (French Alsthom old generation, Italian Ansaldo Breda and French new Alstom AGV) = combination of old and new machines of different tech on the same railtrack

I use Thalys rail service to AMS every monday and I arrive late at work half of the time already for the very same reason: after Brussels/Antwerp we share the track with old Bombardier and Ansaldo Breda machinery finding a way to break down in the middle of the way

also consider that on the dutch side (between Antwerp and AMS) some NS trains will NOT run at above 250km/h

the icing of the cake is that speeds are also different:

Thalys = 300KM/H
NS HI-Speed = 250KM/H
AF AGV = 350KM/H

bon courage to AF!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!



AF TW AA NW DL UA CO BA U2 TP UX LH SK AZ MP KL SN VY HV LS SS TK SQ PC RG IW SE
User currently offlineRamzi From Canada, joined Oct 2006, 535 posts, RR: 0
Reply 4, posted (6 years 7 months 2 weeks 23 hours ago) and read 12995 times:



Quoting FlySSC (Thread starter):

At the average speed of 360 km/h, the journey between Schipol and CDG would take 1h30.

how long is it between AMS and CDG by plane?



There will come a time when you believe everything is finished - that will be the beginning.
User currently offlineStitch From United States of America, joined Jul 2005, 30986 posts, RR: 86
Reply 5, posted (6 years 7 months 2 weeks 23 hours ago) and read 12982 times:
Support Airliners.net - become a First Class Member!



Quoting Joost (Reply 2):
Although the trains will technically be able to reach 360 km/h, the track from Paris to Schiphol does not allow these speeds.

Are there any plans to upgrade the track to support the higher speeds?


User currently offlineCARST From Germany, joined Jul 2006, 820 posts, RR: 1
Reply 6, posted (6 years 7 months 2 weeks 23 hours ago) and read 12983 times:



Quoting Joost (Reply 2):
They will never be able to make it in 1h30.

Although the trains will technically be able to reach 360 km/h, the track from Paris to Schiphol does not allow these speeds. There are also many parts of the track that are existing tracks, not high-speed, like:
Schiphol-Hoofddorp: 140 km/h (4 km, existing track)
Hoofddorp-Rotterdam: 300 km/h (only 15km)
Rotterdam-Lombarijden: 140 km/h (7km, existing track)
Lombardijen-Antwerpen: 300 km/h (37 km)
Antwerpen-Brussels: 160 km/h (existing track)



Quoting FlySSC (Thread starter):
At the average speed of 360 km/h, the journey between Schipol and CDG would take 1h30.
The special high speed tracks are already operational to BRU and the last portion to AMS will be opened by the end of this year.

Perhaps you should read carefully. If FlsySSC's source (see his thread) is right, the high speed rails only exist till BRU (starting in CDG) and will be build on the BRU-AMS leg this year. (The source says the works will be finished by the end of this year, so perhaps they are already building them.)


Topic:
I think it is a very smart move. From 2010 onwards flight operations between KL and AF can be synchronized much better. The AirFrance-KLM merger could work much better this way and a lot of slots can be used for more longhaul flights, as flights between CDG and AMS aren't needed anymore.

The question remains how much time is needed from gate (in CDG) to gate (AMS) and visa versa. If it only will take something like 15 minutes, it would be perfect for them, as for a passenger it won't matter if you spend your 2 hours between flights at the terminal or in a train with large seats, a lot of seat space and a bar waggon.


User currently offlineJoost From Netherlands, joined Apr 2005, 3169 posts, RR: 4
Reply 7, posted (6 years 7 months 2 weeks 23 hours ago) and read 12900 times:

Quoting CARST (Reply 6):
Perhaps you should read carefully. If FlsySSC's source (see his thread) is right, the high speed rails only exist till BRU (starting in CDG) and will be build on the BRU-AMS leg this year. (The source says the works will be finished by the end of this year, so perhaps they are already building them.)


Carst, the tracks I wrote about ARE the tracks you are talking about. They started building in 2000. The track itself is completely ready, but the security systems isn't ready yet.

This project consists of two new tracks: (errors in my previous lengths, sorry)
* 20 km new track (correction) from Rotterdam Centraal to Hoofddorp (4 km from Schiphol, where it will join the existing line)
* around 100 km new track from Rotterdam Lombardijen (7 km from Rotterdam centraal) to Antwerpen Centraal.

These tracks allow 300 km/h.

And one upgraded track:
Antwerpen Centraal - Brussels North: 160 km/h.

This is the new track you are talking about.


Quoting Stitch (Reply 5):

Are there any plans to upgrade the track to support the higher speeds?

I don't know about the Belgian part, but for the Dutch part:
* The existing tracks (Schiphol-Hoofddorp and Rotterdam-Lombardijen) will not be replaced, as these are merely tunnel tracks and tracks through central Rotterdam
* I don't know if the infrastructure is technically capable of 360, but as the NS Hispeed trains will only run at 250, I doubt they will allow 360.

[Edited 2008-02-07 11:23:50]

User currently offlineCARST From Germany, joined Jul 2006, 820 posts, RR: 1
Reply 8, posted (6 years 7 months 2 weeks 23 hours ago) and read 12847 times:

And by reading that another question pops up my head ...

(Sorry i don't want to hijack your thread, but...)

... why doesn't LH and DB (Deutsche Bahn) manage to build something like this?


CDG-BRU-AMS - 272mi / 236nm / 438km - 1:30h (from 2010)
FRA-STR-MUC - 215mi / 186nm / 346km - 4:25h
FRA-HAJ-SXF - 318mi / 276nm / 512km - 5:19h


We seem to have quite slow connections here in Germany compared to the new AF project. Anyone know why? And why nothing is done to cut the times down? There is so much talk in this country about our fast high speed trains, but they don't seem to be an alternative to airplanes. Considering check in times on national flights (not so long compared to long haul) there is no reason to take the train for the above mentioned legs.


User currently offlineCARST From Germany, joined Jul 2006, 820 posts, RR: 1
Reply 9, posted (6 years 7 months 2 weeks 23 hours ago) and read 12805 times:



Quoting Joost (Reply 7):
...

Carst, the tracks I wrote about ARE the tracks you are talking about. They started building in 2000. The track itself is completely ready, but the security systems isn't ready yet.

...

Okay i didn't know that, so i stand corrected. Thx for the information.

And u didn't know that, but AF will know that. I think they will make their plans with the correct numbers and won't take their 1:30h number out of nowhere. If they say theay will make it in this time it will be possible.


And i would think all major airlines around the world should think about connecting their hubs that aren't farther apart than about 400 to 500km (300mi) with high speed trains. Would free up slots, be more efficient and could be faster on that small distances than using a plane (with boarding, taxiing (think about taxi queues), de-boarding, etc.).


User currently offlineTheSonntag From Germany, joined Jun 2005, 3587 posts, RR: 29
Reply 10, posted (6 years 7 months 2 weeks 23 hours ago) and read 12801 times:

Without doubt the new high speed train connections are great, but the railroad tracks so far are far from being completed everywhere.

I retired my VW bug car (it will get reactivated in some years once I got the money to restore it), and thus I must rely on Deutsche Bahn at the moment.

From Siegburg/Bonn close to Bonn, to Augsburg, where I live now, I sometimes manage to get good offers on the ICE train.

The trip takes 3 hours 40, very good compared to 5-6 hours by car (even a modern one cannot get you there faster than maybe 4 hours).

However, it takes 2 hours to get to Stuttgart (40 minutes to Frankfurt Airport, from there around 40 minutes to Mannheim, and then 40 minutes to Stuttgart).

From Stuttgart, it takes another 1 hour 50 minutes due to the 160 year old railtrack between Stuttgart and Augsburg.

Speed between Siegburg-Frankfurt: 300 km/h, Frankfurt - Mannheim 160 to 200 km/h (will be rebuilt on some years to 300 km/h, but is acceptable already), Mannheim-Stuttgart 250 km/h (one of the oldest German high speed tracks).

From Stuttgart to Ulm, it is 50 minutes with an average speed of 120 or so, going down to 70 on the Geislinger Steige. A new 250 km/h track will be built between Stuttgart and Ulm until 2020. Augsburg - Ulm remains rather slow for the foreseeable future. Augsburg - Munich will be 230 km/h in one year, it is 200 at the moment.

So do not get fooled by trains just because they are able to go 300. This is an impressive achievement, and everybody who has been on the ICE between Frankfurt and Cologne will be extremely expressed. But there are still lots of slow tracks remaining, where the ICE is only a little bit faster than the steam trains in the 1950s...

Michael


User currently offlineSQ6807 From New Zealand, joined Jan 2008, 163 posts, RR: 0
Reply 11, posted (6 years 7 months 2 weeks 23 hours ago) and read 12740 times:



Quoting Joost (Reply 7):
Carst, the tracks I wrote about ARE the tracks you are talking about. They started building in 2000. The track itself is completely ready, but the security systems isn't ready yet.

Joost, given what you say about the tracks, are you able to provide an estimate of how long you think the CDG-AMS run would be, if not 1.30hrs, how much longer?

It strikes me that while the distance between CDG and AMS is about *ten times* longer than between LHR and LGW, KL/AF may well be able to offer better connectivity between its two main hubs than BA can!


User currently offlineCARST From Germany, joined Jul 2006, 820 posts, RR: 1
Reply 12, posted (6 years 7 months 2 weeks 23 hours ago) and read 12727 times:

Thats why i think there should be much more effort to build high speed tracks on important routes like FRA-STR-MUC and FRA-HAJ-SXF (SXF will be BBI). 300km/h+ should be the speed on these tracks without parts with lower speeds.

User currently offlineFlySSC From United States of America, joined Aug 2003, 7412 posts, RR: 57
Reply 13, posted (6 years 7 months 2 weeks 23 hours ago) and read 12692 times:

The distance between CDG Airport and Schipol is around 480km.

Quoting SQ6807 (Reply 11):
are you able to provide an estimate of how long you think the CDG-AMS run would be, if not 1.30hrs, how much longer?

The medias reporting the information today, were talking of 1h30 or "less than 2 hours" (sic).


User currently offlineTheSonntag From Germany, joined Jun 2005, 3587 posts, RR: 29
Reply 14, posted (6 years 7 months 2 weeks 22 hours ago) and read 12614 times:



Quoting CARST (Reply 12):

But you know how expensive a high speed train connection through Germany is, do you? Germany isn't exactly flat, and already the high-speed lane Hanover-Würzburg cost several billion Euros. Constant effort is undertaken to build more high-speed railroads. I just don't see how this could be done faster with the existing budget.

Wikipedia, btw, has a nice map about the German high-speed railroad network.

http://de.wikipedia.org/wiki/Bild:ICE_Network.png


User currently offlinePHKLM From Northern Mariana Islands, joined Dec 2005, 1198 posts, RR: 2
Reply 15, posted (6 years 7 months 2 weeks 22 hours ago) and read 12551 times:



Quoting Joost (Reply 7):
I don't know if the infrastructure is technically capable of 360, but as the NS Hispeed trains will only run at 250, I doubt they will allow 360

Design speed is 300 km/h.
Bear in mind it doesn't make sense to go any faster, the first track is only 20km long, it takes a mere 4 minutes to cover this at full speed, the time it takes to reach any speeds higher than 300 km/h will likely be useless, as it simply it to short to make any real difference.
The second stretch (Rotterdam - Antwerp) is only 70km long (HST track), so it takes only 14 minutes to cover this. Running at 360km/h would cut this to 11,5 minutes, a gain of 2,5 minutes.
This clearly shows the LGV Nord in its current form is never going to compete with air travel of you purely look at the AMS-CDG stretch. The project lacks a by-pass around Brussels, a HST track between Brussels and Antwerp, a by-pass around Antwerp, a by-pass around Rotterdam and HST track between Schiphol and Amsterdam. I realize adding these by-passes would make the project incredibly expensive, still it is the only way to win a race AMS-CDG by train. For now flying is much faster, considering check-in 45 mins prior to departure and a 1 hr flight.


User currently offlineFlySSC From United States of America, joined Aug 2003, 7412 posts, RR: 57
Reply 16, posted (6 years 7 months 2 weeks 22 hours ago) and read 12521 times:



Quoting PHKLM (Reply 15):
For now flying is much faster, considering check-in 45 mins prior to departure and a 1 hr flight.

My last flight CDG to AMS (no ATC delay):

Taxiing CDG : 24 mn (from 2F to take off from 09R)
Flight time (T.O to landing) : 46 mn)
Taxiing at AMS : 28 mn (landing on 18R)

Total from gate to gate : 1h38


User currently offlineJoost From Netherlands, joined Apr 2005, 3169 posts, RR: 4
Reply 17, posted (6 years 7 months 2 weeks 22 hours ago) and read 12449 times:



Quoting CARST (Reply 9):
And u didn't know that, but AF will know that. I think they will make their plans with the correct numbers and won't take their 1:30h number out of nowhere. If they say theay will make it in this time it will be possible.

What is mentioned in the media is not always the same as stated by the airline. 1:30 is absolutely impossible for CDG-AMS by train. The current Thalys at a full-track HST Paris Nord - Brussels Midi takes already 1:22 running 300 km/h all the way. There is no possible way to run Brussels-Schiphol in 8 minutes.

Quoting SQ6807 (Reply 11):
Joost, given what you say about the tracks, are you able to provide an estimate of how long you think the CDG-AMS run would be, if not 1.30hrs, how much longer?

From the High Speed Alliance: http://www.highspeedalliance.nl/static/hsa/nl/trajecten.html
These values are for the HST(!!!):

Amsterdam - Rotterdam: 0:36
Amsterdam - Antwerpen: 1:10
Amsterdam - Brussel Zuid: 1:56
Amsterdam - Parijs: 3:13 min

Now the sector Amsterdam-Schiphol is 16 minutes, so Schiphol-Paris Nord will be 2:57. CDG is 12 minutes shorter, so travel time will be 2:45.

Quoting PHKLM (Reply 15):
The second stretch (Rotterdam - Antwerp) is only 70km long (HST track), so it takes only 14 minutes to cover this. Running at 360km/h would cut this to 11,5 minutes, a gain of 2,5 minutes.

Are you sure about the 70km number? Rotterdam-Antwerp is longer; which part is conventional track, besides the 7km to Lombardijen? Anyway, the travel times indicate 50 minutes.

Quoting PHKLM (Reply 15):
The project lacks a by-pass around Brussels

It would never generate enough pax on Amsterdam to Paris alone. Keep in mind one Thalys train seats more pax than an A380.

Quoting PHKLM (Reply 15):
a HST track between Brussels and Antwerp,

Biggest mistake. Not only for the speed (that doesn't matter much), but because of interference with other trains.

Quoting PHKLM (Reply 15):
It is the only way to win a race AMS-CDG by train.

For the O&D market, it's perfectly fine. For the AF-KL hub connection, it's no alternative indeed.


User currently offlineR2rho From Germany, joined Feb 2007, 2630 posts, RR: 1
Reply 18, posted (6 years 7 months 2 weeks 21 hours ago) and read 12348 times:

AF an integrated multimodal carrier? Sounds good, it could very well be the future!  thumbsup 

Quoting CARST (Reply 8):
... why doesn't LH and DB (Deutsche Bahn) manage to build something like this?

I've always asked myself why they didn't make the Munich-Nürnberg line pass through MUC. Such a wasted opportunity...

Quoting TheSonntag (Reply 14):
Germany isn't exactly flat

No, but it's quite flat compared to, say, Spain, so that's not really an excuse  Wink


User currently offlineCOEWR787 From United States of America, joined Mar 2005, 337 posts, RR: 3
Reply 19, posted (6 years 7 months 2 weeks 20 hours ago) and read 12197 times:



Quoting Joost (Reply 17):
The current Thalys at a full-track HST Paris Nord - Brussels Midi takes already 1:22 running 300 km/h all the way.

Actually they run at 300kmh only about 3/4ths of the way. The rest is run at slower speed for various reasons including lack of high speed tracks approaching Brussels between roughly Brussels Forest and Brussels Midi and also Paris Nord to Villiers le Belle Gonesse. Admittedly, at least at the Paris end things are not going to change, although the routing from CDG to the main LGV Nord Europa is a high speed line thus avoiding the slow portion between Paris Nord and the LGV.. At the Brussels end if the Eurocrats are really serious about this service they ought to consider doing something to transit across Brussels faster.

But all said, I agree with you that with current and currently planned/under construction infrastructure 1:30 from CDG to AMS will be difficult if not impossible.


User currently offlineA380US From United States of America, joined Mar 2007, 2358 posts, RR: 0
Reply 20, posted (6 years 7 months 2 weeks 15 hours ago) and read 11773 times:

Wow first charter airlines then all business class and now trains??
What is next for the airlines?



www.JandACosmetics.com
User currently offlineSteeler83 From United States of America, joined Feb 2006, 9209 posts, RR: 20
Reply 21, posted (6 years 7 months 2 weeks 15 hours ago) and read 11708 times:

Excellent! I would love to be able to go to Paris, then take a daytrip up to Amsterdam via HSR!

2010? Yeah, I should be able to afford that by then...  duck 



Do not bring stranger girt into your room. The stranger girt is dangerous, it will hurt your life.
User currently offlineBabybus From , joined Dec 1969, posts, RR:
Reply 22, posted (6 years 7 months 2 weeks 12 hours ago) and read 11101 times:

So airlines will evolve into high speed travel providers. That's a great way forward.

I don't have time to look it up but isn't BA a major shareholder in Eurostar? If so, the concept of an airline running a train service isn't new.  Wink


User currently offlineTGV From France, joined Dec 2004, 874 posts, RR: 20
Reply 23, posted (6 years 7 months 2 weeks 11 hours ago) and read 10760 times:



Quoting CARST (Reply 9):
And u didn't know that, but AF will know that. I think they will make their plans with the correct numbers and won't take their 1:30h number out of nowhere.



Quoting FlySSC (Reply 13):
The medias reporting the information today, were talking of 1h30 or "less than 2 hours" (sic).

Media are not more accurate when they report about rail than when they report about air transport !

Quoting PHKLM (Reply 15):
Bear in mind it doesn't make sense to go any faster, the first track is only 20km long, it takes a mere 4 minutes to cover this at full speed, the time it takes to reach any speeds higher than 300 km/h will likely be useless, as it simply it to short to make any real difference.
The second stretch (Rotterdam - Antwerp) is only 70km long (HST track), so it takes only 14 minutes to cover this. Running at 360km/h would cut this to 11,5 minutes, a gain of 2,5 minutes.

In addition of the speed, acceleration times have to be considered: when you have a short stretch of line with a higher speed, you need some time (and distance) to reach this maximum speed from the entry point of the stretch.

And the higher the speed you enter, the lower the acceleration rate available.

For initial estimations we (as my pseudo suggests I have some railway knowledge) we usually consider for such acceleration rates:
- 300 to 330: 0.2 m/s2
- 330 to 360: 0.1 m/s2

With such values you need more than 10 km to pass from 300 to 360 km/h.
And at the exit you have to brake to pass the end of the section at the lower speed (deceleration rate: -0.2 m/s2).

Therefore it is important to have long sections with high speed if you want to make the most of high speeds.

Another point that is implicit is the capacity of a railway line: the higher capacity is obtained when the speeds of trains running on the line are similar.

The higher the differences between speeds, the lower the line capacity. From the infrastructure point of view having trains with max speed of 250 and 360 on the same section is not good at all.

Considering the 70 km section mentioned above, max speed of 250 and 360, running times rounded to 17 minutes for 250 and 12 for 360 (train schedules are built with a 60 sec or 30 sec accuracy depending on networks), and headway (time between 2 following trains) of 3 minutes, if you want to have a 360 km/h train running in a schedule built for 250 km/h trains, the 360 train will "cost" (i.e. use the same time/space on the line) than 2.66 trains running at 250.

So it is likely the infrastructure manager will price the 360 km/h path (a path is to the timing of the movement of a train along a given route) far higher than a 250 km/h path.



Avoid 777 with 3-4-3 config in Y ! They are real sardine cans. (AF/KL for example)
User currently offlineJoost From Netherlands, joined Apr 2005, 3169 posts, RR: 4
Reply 24, posted (6 years 7 months 2 weeks 9 hours ago) and read 10335 times:



Quoting COEWR787 (Reply 19):
Actually they run at 300kmh only about 3/4ths of the way. The rest is run at slower speed for various reasons including lack of high speed tracks approaching Brussels between roughly Brussels Forest and Brussels Midi and also Paris Nord to Villiers le Belle Gonesse.

Of course, you are right. Also the Paris Nord - Brussels stretch has some slower portions, mostly close to the cities, just like the rest of the line. (or almost any HST) What I actually meant is that the Brussels-Paris/CDG track does not allow too much speed improvements. (Except of course the 17km section south of Brussels, but I doubt it.

IMO, the Brussels South - Antwerp Central section is the most appealing stretch to upgrade to full HST.

Quoting PHKLM (Reply 15):
Bear in mind it doesn't make sense to go any faster, the first track is only 20km long, it takes a mere 4 minutes to cover this at full speed, the time it takes to reach any speeds higher than 300 km/h will likely be useless, as it simply it to short to make any real difference.

I always wondered why they actually designed the link at 300 km/h. Running maximum 300 km/h instead of 250 km/h on the Rotterdam-Schiphol section saves what? 1 minute?


25 TheSonntag : Off topic, but let me answer anyway. It is not quite THAT bad. The problem is that MUC has no real train connection to Munich. When (or better said I
26 Vinniewinnie : Spot on! The North-South tunnel in Brussels allowing trains to pass through Brussels without reversing is 40-50KM/h max speed so you actually already
27 Joost : That's what I was thinking. Currently, Brussels-CDG trains stop for over 10 minutes in Lille. Non-stop, they can run it in 1:10. Brussels-AMS (Schiph
28 Alessandro : Good news, the booking system for European trains in other EU countries are in a mess. Any bonus flightmiles given on trains BTW?
29 Joost : Correction: the Amsterdam-Brussels services will not call at Breda. The following will be the schedule: 1 tph Amsterdam-Schiphol-Rotterdam-Antwerp-Br
30 Ferroviarius : Well, yes and no. This Transrapid is, as some of you will know, a really touchy issue. I do personally think it would be much better to link the clas
31 Gorgos : Going from city center to city center, the highspeed train link is going to be faster. I've taken the Thalys numerous times. Sure, flying is fun, but.
32 BlueFlyer : BRU the airport or BRU the city ? Is that why it doesn't work as a high speed track ? I have taken several trips between Brussels and AMS both ways.
33 Post contains images R2rho : Yup. You get AF miles for taking the Thalys CDG-Brussels, and you book the ticket through the AF website as if it were a connecting flight. Totally a
34 Joost : The track is not even used by trains yet. I don't understand how you could have taken the train on the new high-speed section, as no trains are runni
35 JoFMO : In fact they only build a new line on the northern half between Ingolstadt and Nuremberg. The southern section into Munich goes over the upgraded old
Top Of Page
Forum Index

This topic is archived and can not be replied to any more.

Printer friendly format

Similar topics:More similar topics...
Air France To Operate Leased 744LRF posted Thu May 3 2001 17:30:22 by Airmale
High Speed Train In Argentina : Impact On Air Link posted Wed Jan 16 2008 12:14:16 by FlySSC
AF-KLM To Start High Speed Train Service? posted Sun May 6 2007 19:11:44 by BMIFlyer
Air France Will Operate The 777 To SFO In March! posted Sun Oct 7 2001 17:53:40 by 777-500ER
Air Slovakia To Operate DAC-BTS-London? posted Wed Nov 7 2007 07:40:30 by USADreamliner
Air France To Compete At Heathrow In Delta Jv posted Tue Oct 16 2007 05:07:21 by DAL767400ER
Air France To Discontinue Daylight JFK CDG posted Mon Aug 13 2007 16:05:16 by HB-IWC
Air France To Offer Direct MIA-SXM Flights posted Sat Jul 28 2007 15:32:45 by MAH4546
Why No Air France To Abu Dhabi? posted Wed Jun 6 2007 19:51:02 by GoMEA
Air India To Operate MEL posted Mon Mar 5 2007 01:06:04 by Bakestar
Air France Will Operate The 777 To SFO In March! posted Sun Oct 7 2001 17:53:40 by 777-500ER
KLM/Air France To Charge Obese Passengers posted Tue Jan 19 2010 23:16:46 by TheCommodore
Air France To Bid On CSA posted Thu Mar 5 2009 08:59:39 by LAXintl
Air France To Delay Tender For 100 Aircraft.. posted Fri Nov 21 2008 02:44:19 by Beaucaire
Air France To Canada posted Thu Nov 20 2008 12:46:45 by Thenoflyzone
Air France To Tokyo HANEDA, Scheduled! posted Fri Oct 24 2008 19:08:44 by ConcordeBoy