Sponsor Message:
Civil Aviation Forum
My Starred Topics | Profile | New Topic | Forum Index | Help | Search 
Bullet Train Long Term Impact On FAT…  
User currently offlineIkramerica From United States of America, joined May 2005, 21583 posts, RR: 59
Posted (6 years 1 month 2 weeks 2 days 21 hours ago) and read 8430 times:

Well, the high speed rail plan actually passed here in California, and even though I voted for it, I did not know it was going to stop in Fresno.

The current plans call for connecting Anaheim, Los Angeles, Fresno and San Francisco (and I would have to assume San Jose and the mid-peninsula would get stops too, likely near SFO and SJC, and possibly somewhere near ONT as well). A future bond measure would be needed to expand the route to San Diego, Sacramento and Oakland.

With Fresno being connected via rail to both major markets in the future, what impact will that have on FAT? Travel time will be under 1.5 hours from Fresno to either downtown San Francisco or Los Angeles, so it makes flying pointless unless you are connecting to somewhere else.


Of all the things to worry about... the Wookie has no pants.
65 replies: All unread, showing first 25:
 
User currently offlineAlias1024 From United States of America, joined Oct 2004, 2808 posts, RR: 2
Reply 1, posted (6 years 1 month 2 weeks 2 days 21 hours ago) and read 8414 times:

Probably a reduction in frequency on the SFO and LAX routes, but there is still a great deal of connecting traffic on those flights. I actually wonder if it won't be a boon to Fresno. Taking all those vehicles off of the terrible highway 99 will help the poor air quality in the valley, and the easy link to downtown Los Angeles and San Francisco when combined with lower cost of living may convince some companies to relocate some workers to Fresno. In the end, the growth caused by the train may be enough to negate the impact on air travel demand.


It is a mistake to think you can solve any major problems with just potatoes.
User currently offlineIkramerica From United States of America, joined May 2005, 21583 posts, RR: 59
Reply 2, posted (6 years 1 month 2 weeks 2 days 20 hours ago) and read 8405 times:

When I lived in Palo Alto, I dated a girl north of Fresno. A bullet train would have been great back then. The drive wasn't that bad, but traffic could be bad, and the farms smelled awful in the summer.


Of all the things to worry about... the Wookie has no pants.
User currently offlineAlias1024 From United States of America, joined Oct 2004, 2808 posts, RR: 2
Reply 3, posted (6 years 1 month 2 weeks 2 days 20 hours ago) and read 8350 times:

99 is a real turd of a highway. I don't get it, why run I-5 up the deserted side of the valley, and put crummy 99 on the populated side? The freaking highway is 2 lane in some areas north of Madera. The bullet train can't arrive soon enough.


It is a mistake to think you can solve any major problems with just potatoes.
User currently offlineIkramerica From United States of America, joined May 2005, 21583 posts, RR: 59
Reply 4, posted (6 years 1 month 2 weeks 2 days 20 hours ago) and read 8290 times:



Quoting Alias1024 (Reply 3):
99 is a real turd of a highway. I don't get it, why run I-5 up the deserted side of the valley, and put crummy 99 on the populated side? The freaking highway is 2 lane in some areas north of Madera. The bullet train can't arrive soon enough.

All I ever saw of I-5 was crossing it. I went 101, then across Pacheco Pass across to 99, a bit on 99, then up towards Yosemite.

I-5 is a major trucking route, but you are right, it doesn't go near most of the major towns or cities in the valley.



Of all the things to worry about... the Wookie has no pants.
User currently offlineAlias1024 From United States of America, joined Oct 2004, 2808 posts, RR: 2
Reply 5, posted (6 years 1 month 2 weeks 2 days 19 hours ago) and read 8265 times:

I think the bullet train will be good. The construction jobs will be a nice boon the the valley as well. This thread in non-av has a picture of the proposed route system.
http://www.airliners.net/aviation-fo...ms/non_aviation/read.main/2001546/



It is a mistake to think you can solve any major problems with just potatoes.
User currently offlineDesertAir From Mexico, joined Jan 2006, 1481 posts, RR: 0
Reply 6, posted (6 years 1 month 2 weeks 2 days 14 hours ago) and read 8019 times:



Quoting Alias1024 (Reply 3):
99 is a real turd of a highway. I don't get it, why run I-5 up the deserted side of the valley, and put crummy 99 on the populated side? The freaking highway is 2 lane in some areas north of Madera. The bullet train can't arrive soon enough.

Highway 99 existed before I-5.

It seems to me that a bullet train could be very successful in the San Joaquin Valley. Amtrack has had a lot of success. As the Fresno area grows there should be more demand for air service to hubs to avoid having to fly out of LAX or SFO.


User currently offlineOzGlobal From France, joined Nov 2004, 2732 posts, RR: 4
Reply 7, posted (6 years 1 month 2 weeks 2 days 13 hours ago) and read 7952 times:

It's easy, just look at what HSR has done to similar centres in Europe. You don't need to imagine the scenarios in some abstract manner. Just get some facts on the suspension of air services CDG - Lyon, CDG - Brussels, CDG - Marsailles, Cologne - Frankfurt, Madrid - Barcelona or Taiwan, Japan, etc. It's always amazing to me how each time a change is introduced of this type people feel the impact has to be estimated from first principles, rather than just looking over the fence to see how it has worked elsewhere. The ban on smoking in France was the same. The discsussion was as if it had never been tried or suggested anywhere else. Now it's just accepted as normal, less than twelve months later.


When all's said and done, there'll be more said than done.
User currently offlineNaritaflyer From Japan, joined Apr 2006, 549 posts, RR: 1
Reply 8, posted (6 years 1 month 2 weeks 2 days 12 hours ago) and read 7888 times:

The high speed train concept will not work in America. People there make the mistake of looking to Japan, Germany and France for good examples of how the train system has enhanced inter0city travel. Problem with the U.S. is the lack of train connectivity at destination. Say you catch the train from San Francisco to L.A. once in L.A. you will need a car there. In Japan I can go from my house in Tokyo to my friend's house in Osaka by train. Other than in New York, that's unthinkable in America. But, you got to start somewhere and that's a good start.

User currently offlineWhatUsaid From United States of America, joined Feb 2007, 667 posts, RR: 0
Reply 9, posted (6 years 1 month 2 weeks 2 days 11 hours ago) and read 7775 times:

I doubt that high-speed will have any impact on intra-state air travel at FAT. O&D to those cities has vanished due to the high fares in the market. Express Jet was able to document the demand for low-cost service to San Diego, but that success was very much tied to the fact that driving through LAX is one very big pain.

High-speed train isn't cheap. In my travels in Japan and Europe, it's always been at or above air travel. My $50 RT to Sacramento on Amtrak today would be somewhere close to $400 RT or more, I would think on high-speed. I question whether the voters who approved this bond measure (which is not anywhere close to the final price tag for the system) understand that you don't get a 200 mph train at an Amtrak price.

Amtrak rattles up and down the valley 12 times each day and finally added another coach to the peak trains so that you actually might have a seat. If Amtrak had rental car availability at its stations, the service would be more attractive to those like I, who've given up on air travel due to the expense ($1K RT FAT-SFO on UAX), but remain frustrated that once I'm in Emeryville, there's no rental car on-site.

I really doubt we'll see high-speed rail in my lifetime....and I'm not that old (50)... I'd rather place my bet on WN coming into FAT.


User currently offlinePnwtraveler From Canada, joined Jun 2007, 2296 posts, RR: 12
Reply 10, posted (6 years 1 month 2 weeks 2 days 11 hours ago) and read 7753 times:

I am not sure how many cars the train will take off the road. Hopefully a lot. It will however take flyers off aircraft, particularly between LA and SF. If the route can be maximized for straight and level, speeds will be high and therefore time between cities less. At some point rail becomes time competitive with going through security and congestion at airports. Similarly between YYZ and YUL a high speed service of around two and half hours (downtown to downtown) would kill a lot of Porter and AC Rapidair traffic. Probably more of the latter because Porter already has the advantage of much less hastle at Toronto City Centre than AC at Pearson.

User currently offlineEnilria From Canada, joined Feb 2008, 7693 posts, RR: 15
Reply 11, posted (6 years 1 month 2 weeks 2 days 10 hours ago) and read 7680 times:

If the station in FAT is convenient and parking is suitable AND it connects directly to LAX or SFO it will suck the life out of the FAT airport. It is likely, however, one of those things won't happen and it will only marginally hurt the airport.

How would you like to be on it during an earthquake?


User currently offlineGSPSPOT From United States of America, joined Sep 2003, 3105 posts, RR: 2
Reply 12, posted (6 years 1 month 2 weeks 2 days 10 hours ago) and read 7660 times:



Quoting Naritaflyer (Reply 8):
The high speed train concept will not work in America. People there make the mistake of looking to Japan, Germany and France for good examples of how the train system has enhanced inter0city travel. Problem with the U.S. is the lack of train connectivity at destination. Say you catch the train from San Francisco to L.A. once in L.A. you will need a car there. In Japan I can go from my house in Tokyo to my friend's house in Osaka by train. Other than in New York, that's unthinkable in America. But, you got to start somewhere and that's a good start.

I disagree - but it won't look exactly the same, either. I would suggest making stops at major airports instead of downtowns. A high-speed rail station at major (and maybe even some no-so-major) airports would give travelers access to "ground transportation", including rental cars & public transport. I would LOVE to have a workable alternative to the hassles of flying, or fighting trafffic and road construction on mid-length trips.



Finally made it to an airline mecca!
User currently offlinePanAm747 From United States of America, joined Feb 2004, 4242 posts, RR: 8
Reply 13, posted (6 years 1 month 2 weeks 2 days 10 hours ago) and read 7645 times:

Don't forget that Bakersfield will be a stop on this route!!

As for FAT, I think it will be fine - as stated, some of the short distance flights may see a reduction in frequency, but the business traveller connecting to other locales may want to skip the hassle of transferring from the train to the airport. Besides, has it been stated for a fact that it will stop at LAX or SFO?

Realistically, though, you won't see if for at least 20+ years, and who knows what air travel will look like then?



Pan Am:The World's Most Experienced Airline - P(oor) S(ailor's) A(irline): San Diego's Hometown Airline-Catch Our Smile!
User currently offlineHighflier92660 From United States of America, joined Apr 2004, 697 posts, RR: 0
Reply 14, posted (6 years 1 month 2 weeks 2 days 10 hours ago) and read 7639 times:

Despite the California proposition passing nobody should hold their collective breathes. These high speed rail measures have a way of being tossed around for years between politicians and political parties, or studied ad-infinitum until they die a quite death; see Florida. I voted for the proposition with full knowledge of the insurmountable odds of a 200 mph TGV type train ever serving California between Los Angeles, Sacramento and the Bay area. A similar project, the maglev train between Anaheim and Las Vegas, is another fanciful project that is likly to die on the launching pad. The construction costs alone for these projects are prohibitive.

If anyone doubts the amount of inertia and political will it takes to build infrastructure in the State of California, look at the numerous freeway projects that have taken decades to build (the 105 freeway to LAX) or improvement projects that are still underway that will be obsolete upon ribbon cutting (the I-5 widening north of the Orange County line.)

Still, it's always fun to dream of these high speed trains in artist depictions.


User currently offlineNRA-3B From United States of America, joined Oct 2000, 167 posts, RR: 0
Reply 15, posted (6 years 1 month 2 weeks 2 days 10 hours ago) and read 7580 times:

It appears you folks are not familiar with the state government of California. I really don't expect to see a high speed train system in California in my lifetime based on the tax increase forced by this proposition. The legislature here has a long track record of not properly using tax money. They will most likely spend it on their pet pork barrel projects. I saw nothing in the proposition that will provide accountability for the use of this money. As an example, all the gas taxes that supposedly are intended for highway and road construction have never been used for that purpose during my 30+ years in California. They just send that money to the general fund for use in their 'social engineering programs'.
It is possible that some private capital may eventually do something similar; the Las Vegas- LA route.......

Cheers,
Bob


User currently offlineGSPSPOT From United States of America, joined Sep 2003, 3105 posts, RR: 2
Reply 16, posted (6 years 1 month 2 weeks 2 days 8 hours ago) and read 7450 times:



Quoting Highflier92660 (Reply 14):
If anyone doubts the amount of inertia and political will it takes to build infrastructure in the State of California, look at the numerous freeway projects that have taken decades to build (the 105 freeway to LAX) or improvement projects that are still underway that will be obsolete upon ribbon cutting (the I-5 widening north of the Orange County line.)

Don't forget about feasability studies, etc. UGH. The governments in the I-85 corridor where I live (basically Atlanta northeast thru SC, NC in into VA) have been kicking around a high-speed rail line to relieve the region's overworked interstates for a while now. What will it take to get these things past the concept stage?



Finally made it to an airline mecca!
User currently offlineIkramerica From United States of America, joined May 2005, 21583 posts, RR: 59
Reply 17, posted (6 years 1 month 2 weeks 2 days 6 hours ago) and read 7452 times:



Quoting OzGlobal (Reply 7):
It's easy, just look at what HSR has done to similar centres in Europe. You don't need to imagine the scenarios in some abstract manner. Just get some facts

The USA is NOT Europe, California is not Europe, and thus we can look to the EU and Japan for perspective, but it's not as easy as applying "facts" to the situation.

I assume you've never been to Fresno…

Non-stop and relatively fast train service between NYC and DC has not lead to a major decrease in flights between the markets, they more compliment each other.

I would assume the same would be true between SFO and LAX areas, as it would convince some flyers to take the train, and some drivers to take the train.

Quoting Naritaflyer (Reply 8):
Problem with the U.S. is the lack of train connectivity at destination.

Absolutely. We don't have subway systems in most cities. We have limited light rail at best, and these systems usually involve the "park and ride" concept. If you are visiting a city, where's the car going to come from to get your where you need to go?

This is why I could see it working if it connected to SFO and SJC, or if there were rental car facilities at each stop similar to an airport (and they didn't overcharge like some very small airports do).



Of all the things to worry about... the Wookie has no pants.
User currently offlineBOSSAN From United States of America, joined Aug 2004, 255 posts, RR: 0
Reply 18, posted (6 years 1 month 2 weeks 2 days 6 hours ago) and read 7450 times:

The California High Speed Rail Authority has a map of the proposed system up: http://www.cahighspeedrail.ca.gov/map.htm.

The best train-plane transfer for Central Valley residents appears to be on the initial segment, at SFO/Millbrae. Presently a BART shuttle train takes Caltrain passengers from Millbrae one stop to SFO's International terminal. It's projected to be a 1 hour 9 minute trip from central Fresno to SFO/Millbrae.

Other stops proposed at airports are Ontario Airport and Palmdale Airport; Burbank, San Jose and San Diego will be placed within a couple of miles of their respective airports. None of these have as many direct flights as San Francisco, though.

I believe that the high frequency of trains along the mainline will make O&D flights to cities along the rail line uncompetitive, and only ones with connection opportunities will continue. Thus, LAX has a chance at keeping some flights while SFO might disappear or be replaced by a rail code share a la Continental/Amtrak at Newark. On the other hand, flights from Fresno to Denver, Las Vegas, Phoenix, Seattle, Dallas and Salt Lake City should not be impacted.


User currently offlineMOBflyer From United States of America, joined Sep 2007, 1209 posts, RR: 3
Reply 19, posted (6 years 1 month 2 weeks 2 days 5 hours ago) and read 7453 times:

I think the biggest impact may be a positive one... on PMD. According to the schedules, bullet train transit time from downtown LA to ONT and PMD will vary by less than ten minutes. PMD's commercial viability increases exponentially as access to the primary city center improves.

User currently offlineEnilria From Canada, joined Feb 2008, 7693 posts, RR: 15
Reply 20, posted (6 years 1 month 2 weeks 2 days 5 hours ago) and read 7451 times:



Quoting BOSSAN (Reply 18):

The best train-plane transfer for Central Valley residents appears to be on the initial segment, at SFO/Millbrae. Presently a BART shuttle train takes Caltrain passengers from Millbrae one stop to SFO's International terminal. It's projected to be a 1 hour 9 minute trip from central Fresno to SFO/Millbrae.

If it doesn't go within a few hundred feet of the terminals I don't think it will hurt FAT significantly. People aren't going to want to take their bags on the train, then BART, and then arrive at SFO. That's another ugly step.


User currently offlineIkramerica From United States of America, joined May 2005, 21583 posts, RR: 59
Reply 21, posted (6 years 1 month 2 weeks 2 days 5 hours ago) and read 7451 times:



Quoting Enilria (Reply 20):
If it doesn't go within a few hundred feet of the terminals I don't think it will hurt FAT significantly.

It's a shuttle no different than AirTrain or monorails or many other ways of getting from the station to the terminal. Is it as ideal as some EU airports where the high speed stop is in the basement at multiple terminals? No, but it's not the same as getting on a commuter train either.



Of all the things to worry about... the Wookie has no pants.
User currently offlineWingedMigrator From United States of America, joined Oct 2005, 2259 posts, RR: 56
Reply 22, posted (6 years 1 month 2 weeks 2 days 4 hours ago) and read 7452 times:



Quoting BOSSAN (Reply 18):
Presently a BART shuttle train takes Caltrain passengers from Millbrae one stop to SFO's International terminal.

That link got shut down for lack of ridership. Right now, arriving by rail in Millbrae to take the airplane at SFO involves taking BART northbound to San Bruno, changing to BART southbound to SFO, and changing to the airport people mover to get to the terminal. That's right, THREE transfers.

Ten years ago, there was a shuttle van that met every train and dropped you off at the terminal.

Ah, the cost of progress...


User currently offlineScutfarcus From United States of America, joined May 2000, 409 posts, RR: 1
Reply 23, posted (6 years 1 month 2 weeks 2 days 4 hours ago) and read 7453 times:

I agree with the first commenter - this is very good for Fresno and will likely have a big role in improving the economic situation of the entire central valley. This might cause fewer flights to LAX, but with economic growth I would not be surprised to see flights added to DEN, PHX, and other connecting cities to points east.

User currently offlineOzGlobal From France, joined Nov 2004, 2732 posts, RR: 4
Reply 24, posted (6 years 1 month 2 weeks 2 days 4 hours ago) and read 7449 times:



Quoting Ikramerica (Reply 17):

Quoting OzGlobal (Reply 7):
It's easy, just look at what HSR has done to similar centres in Europe. You don't need to imagine the scenarios in some abstract manner. Just get some facts

The USA is NOT Europe, California is not Europe, and thus we can look to the EU and Japan for perspective, but it's not as easy as applying "facts" to the situation.

I assume you've never been to Fresno…

Non-stop and relatively fast train service between NYC and DC has not lead to a major decrease in flights between the markets, they more compliment each other.

I would assume the same would be true between SFO and LAX areas, as it would convince some flyers to take the train, and some drivers to take the train.

Nor is the USA Mars.... We're talking about deploying an HSR service of the same specs as in Europe and Japan, between a string of cities currently served by high frequency air services. There are analogous examples with available data which should allow a good deal of modeling to be done. The point about local metro rail services to meet these rail hubs is pertinent, but far from a show stopper when there is so much city centre to city centre traffic today. BART in SF is not a bad start at that end.

The DC - NY train is not HSR, just an accelerated classic line with new technology. It would cut into air services if it were 200mph all the way. It is still my preference today as it is nonetheless infinitely more civilized than dealing with all the airport commute/security nonsense.

No need to make assumptions about where I've been. I do actually get around.



When all's said and done, there'll be more said than done.
25 DL767captain : I'm sure there will be some frequency reductions on SAN/LAX-SFO but i'm sure there will still be plenty. Every time i have flown to SFO it was for a c
26 Ikramerica : You don't know the situation if that's how you classify the market for Fresno. Sorry, but you don't. You've never been to Fresno. I am not asking abo
27 OzGlobal : If you know everything about it, why ask the question? If you don't want input on comparable routes, don't discuss it. I am often in SF and LA and I
28 DocLightning : I think you'll probably see the elimination of the SFO flight. LAX might live on, albeit with reduced frequency. So pretty much all traffic into FAT
29 FATFlyer : I doubt FAT-SFO will disappear. Fresno feeds a lot of connecting passengers for United at SFO. Plus Fresno is a major Skywest maintenance operation.
30 Ikramerica : I think you are basically right. You'll still probably get 1 or 2 FAT-SFO flights a day to connect to international flights, but that's about it. Wit
31 Post contains links ExFATboy : There's still too many variables to try to figure out exactly what will happen to Fresno's air service if the HSR system is built. And yes, I delibera
32 Spark : As for the effect at FAT, I think it all depends on the cost and convenience of the train between SFO and Fresno (I highly doubt the station will be a
33 WingedMigrator : It will happen by 2015, i.e. the next 6 or 7 years. The engineering is already well advanced, the technology is not anything new, and the money (usua
34 JoFMO : I really hope you are right. And I think the chances are not that bad. Especially when I consider that there is a 'socialist' in the White house now
35 KC135TopBoom : But many in California think they are as smart as the Europeans are. " target=_blank>http://www.cahighspeedrail.ca.gov/ma....htm. I notice the CHSRA
36 AirNZ : If I can ask, why so much talk about the necessity of rental cars at train stations, or why is one seemingly vital within a city? Surely, the way for
37 KiwiRob : Yes it is, it's cheaper with greater frequency to travel between Brussels, London and Paris on Eurostar than on a plane, lots of other routes especia
38 Access-Air : Perhaps only if this high speed rail takes them right to SFO or LAX airports....otherwise, flying will be better. Plus if you are flying say from FAT
39 QXatFAT : Well it seems like the people of the valley though are a little to lazy to drive down to LAX and SFO to connect flights and I think still a train ride
40 Post contains links Spacecadet : What?! Amtrak has decimated the airlines in the northeast corridor. They currently have something like 57% market share, which is up from 11% only 8
41 WhatUsaid : DC is easy, with the Metro right at Union Station. I always use Amtrak in the NE. Amtrak California is a problem. The BART connections at Richmond ar
42 PanAm747 : Be sure of it. Washington, DC's train station is located on Massachusetts Avenue, less than a mile from the Capitol building and within easy walking
43 ExFATboy : American cities are, outside of the Northeast and perhaps Chicago, very spread out, lacking the population density necessary to make public transport
44 Post contains links WingedMigrator : Sure it has. San Francisco is planning a $4.2B terminal. www.transbaycenter.org
45 Centrair : The key for any effective High Speed rail is "within 3 hours". If it can be reached within 3 hours by High-speed train, the train wins. If it can not
46 DocLightning : That's because it's not relatively fast. It's about as fast as driving and far more expensive. A true high-speed train would do the trip in just over
47 JoFMO : Don't you guys in the US have Taxis? What people in europe would do is driving with their car to the train station, park there for the day, take the t
48 DocLightning : Not so much, no. Well, at least not so much in SF. Yes, there are taxis, but only about 1,000 badges in the city. So it can take quite a while to get
49 JoFMO : LA sucks.... That stereotype of LA is why I never felt encouraged to spend any time in the city during my numerous transfers through it with NZ. But
50 RJ111 : They really need to go to LAX i think. With the amount of transpacific flights, people could go from the smaller areas of Caliafornia and change at LA
51 ExFATboy : That works fine for business travel, not so much for leisure. In order to capture tourist travel to the Central Valley (and no jokes at Fresno or Bak
52 TAN FLYR : Obvoiusly you have not been on 99 in a while. Yes, in many areas is still is quite sub-par, however bond monies passed a few years back did improve s
53 FATFlyer : Some people in Fresno are talking about National Park Service supported shuttles to the parks. They would operate from both FAT and Amtrak (later the
54 Spacecadet : Apparently you did not read my earlier reply. Amtrak owns the northeast corridor at this point. Absolutely owns it. It's just wrong to say anything o
55 Buzz100ca : Although I'm always for progress, I think that the train will unfortunately bring an end to MOD-SFO.
56 R2rho : THis is a very interesting project and it's great news to see it passed. Although as with all infrastructure projects, I will only believe it when I s
57 TheCheese : Many of the communities in the service area seem to have an attitude of "if it doesn't benefit us, we're against it" so bypassing those communities f
58 Exaauadl : the train will never get built
59 Anonms : The projected costs for California's HSR for a trip from San Diego to the Bay (since that's the most likely routing for me) is comparable to a plane
60 JoFMO : Having stops does not mean a train has to stop there! There are nonstop trains planned from SF to LA but also semi-fast and all-stoppers. Check out h
61 DocLightning : No, they do not own it. They have 60-70% of the passengers who used to go by air. A good portion of passengers still go by Chinatown bus and by car.
62 JoFMO : These number mus be the air/rail ratio. The overall ratio is rarely given by high speed train companies. They are not after the 15$ packpackers, they
63 DocLightning : That's because they can't compete with BoltBus and I'm willing to bet that BoltBus and similar "premium" bus lines will eat into Acela a lot now that
64 Jaws707 : I believe that busses will not be able to compete with Acela. I would imagine that Amtrak is constantly working on increasing speeds where ever possi
65 R2rho : Actually HSR is not cheap at all over here, I find it quite expensive. I don't know why some people give the false impression that in Europe it is dr
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...
Questions On Airbus's Long Term Product Strategy posted Sat May 19 2007 17:27:16 by Rsbj
AA - Caribbean/SDQ Meltdown Today And Long Term? posted Thu Jun 19 2008 09:47:59 by Baron95
Oil Prices Impact On LAN? posted Tue Jun 10 2008 05:53:31 by Eastern023
Industry Downturn - Impact On Lease Rates posted Mon Jun 9 2008 12:09:20 by AF022
Downsizing: Positive Impact On VLA's? posted Thu Jun 5 2008 18:39:09 by Manfredj
St. Louis' Long Term Air Service Future posted Wed May 28 2008 14:07:56 by LambertMan
USA Today: High Oil Price Impact On US Aviation posted Wed Apr 30 2008 21:09:27 by LAXDESI
Airline Failure: Good For Industry In Long-term? posted Sun Apr 27 2008 12:26:29 by Tuiflyer
Official DL/NW Merger: Impact On Fleets & Routes posted Tue Apr 15 2008 00:02:53 by Moderators
Official DL/NW Merger: Impact On Airports posted Mon Apr 14 2008 22:42:07 by Moderators
Industry Downturn - Impact On Lease Rates posted Mon Jun 9 2008 12:09:20 by AF022
Downsizing: Positive Impact On VLA's? posted Thu Jun 5 2008 18:39:09 by Manfredj
St. Louis' Long Term Air Service Future posted Wed May 28 2008 14:07:56 by LambertMan
USA Today: High Oil Price Impact On US Aviation posted Wed Apr 30 2008 21:09:27 by LAXDESI
Airline Failure: Good For Industry In Long-term? posted Sun Apr 27 2008 12:26:29 by Tuiflyer
Official DL/NW Merger: Impact On Fleets & Routes posted Tue Apr 15 2008 00:02:53 by Moderators