Sponsor Message:
Civil Aviation Forum
My Starred Topics | Profile | New Topic | Forum Index | Help | Search 
UK Transport Secretary Wants Domestic Flights Cut  
User currently offlineAlasdair1982 From UK - Scotland, joined Mar 2008, 468 posts, RR: 0
Posted (5 years 1 month 4 weeks 13 hours ago) and read 4802 times:

http://www.guardian.co.uk/politics/2009/aug/04/high-speed-rail-adonis

I can guess what the responses may be to this, and whether taking any government statement about rail travel seriously. But I have faith in Adonis

28 replies: All unread, showing first 25:
 
User currently offlineKaitak From Ireland, joined Aug 1999, 12480 posts, RR: 34
Reply 1, posted (5 years 1 month 4 weeks 13 hours ago) and read 4748 times:

Of course one's first "knee jerk" reaction is not particularly enthusiastic (and I'm just longing to hear Michael O'Leary's reply!). There are a number of reasons for this:

1) Rail services in the UK can be inefficient (i.e. late) and expensive. With low cost carriers operating very economic types like A319/320s, 738s and Dash8-Q400s, there is certainly an economic advantages to newer types.

2) Many regional airports rely on connection flights, particularly to LHR and MAN (and of course AMS, which I know isn't domestic!) This can make a big difference to access for business and tourism.

3) How does this impact the UK govt's case for the third runway at Heathrow? If they're trying to discourage short range flights (and I do appreciate that only a portion of short haul flights at LHR are domestic), does this (a) weaken the case for the runway, or (b) weaken the case for it to be shorter than the others?


User currently offlineAerecosse From UK - Scotland, joined Mar 2009, 85 posts, RR: 0
Reply 2, posted (5 years 1 month 4 weeks 13 hours ago) and read 4740 times:

yeah and where will they get the money from?

Sounds great in theory but doubt it will ever happen and anyway, you can get from the centre of Glasgow to central London in just over 4 1/2 hours at present.



Flown: BA,BD,BY,AMM,DA,MON,LC,BE,EI,FR,EZY,NW,CO,US,HP,F9,AC,QF,AN,NZ,TN,GZ,MH,EK,EY,PG,IB,JK,FH,BV,LH,SA
User currently offlineB747-4U3 From United Kingdom, joined Jan 2002, 990 posts, RR: 0
Reply 3, posted (5 years 1 month 4 weeks 13 hours ago) and read 4712 times:



Quoting Kaitak (Reply 1):
1) Rail services in the UK can be inefficient (i.e. late) and expensive. With low cost carriers operating very economic types like A319/320s, 738s and Dash8-Q400s, there is certainly an economic advantages to newer types.

From what I have read, this would be a new 250mph line (faster even than the Shinkansen in Japan). Because it would be new it should not suffer from the endless delays we normally have to put up with. As for price, it probably will be more expensive than flying, however it would probably be much much quicker. London to Manchester would take just over an hour which would then make flying longer than the train journey.

Quoting Kaitak (Reply 1):
2) Many regional airports rely on connection flights, particularly to LHR and MAN (and of course AMS, which I know isn't domestic!) This can make a big difference to access for business and tourism.

Yes, this service wouldn't completely eliminate domestic flights. A skeleton schedule and network would still have to be operated to cater for connections.

Quoting Kaitak (Reply 1):
3) How does this impact the UK govt's case for the third runway at Heathrow? If they're trying to discourage short range flights (and I do appreciate that only a portion of short haul flights at LHR are domestic), does this (a) weaken the case for the runway, or (b) weaken the case for it to be shorter than the others?

The Tories, and others, seem to think "high speed railways eliminates the need for a third runway". This is rubbish. The demand for Heathrow will continue to increase and thus the reduction in domestic flights will be replaced by more international services. Furthermore, if the high-speed line is connected to Heathrow it will actually increase demand from Heathrow. The easier the airport is to get to the more desirable it is. If it only takes 30mins to get from Birmingham to Heathrow, people will then start using Heathrow as an alternative to Birmingham.


User currently offlineJoost From Netherlands, joined Apr 2005, 3170 posts, RR: 4
Reply 4, posted (5 years 1 month 4 weeks 12 hours ago) and read 4636 times:

Personally, I think ultra-high speed trains are a waste of money, compared to more traditional train services, say up to 200 km/h. Especially when the branches are not well developed.

I think money can better be spent in really integrating LHR into the railway network as well as connecting several secondary cities to the network.

I do think that a good, well-integrated LHR into the rail network, eliminates the need for domestic flights for a big part. Although both distances and traffic volumes are smaller than in the UK, in the Netherlands the opening of the direct rail link to Schiphol made the feeder flights to Enschede, Groningen, Antwerp (Belgium) and now even Maastricht, obsolete. Similarly, LH ceased CGN-FRA, AF stopped flying CDG-BRU. When Manchester Piccadilly can be reached in say 1:45 on a direct, frequent (at least 1 per hour) train from LHR, this will greatly reduce demand for LHR-MAN. But one should not be required to change trains at one of the many London stations.


User currently offlineBirdwatching From Germany, joined Sep 2003, 3823 posts, RR: 51
Reply 5, posted (5 years 1 month 4 weeks 12 hours ago) and read 4576 times:



Quoting B747-4U3 (Reply 3):
Yes, this service wouldn't completely eliminate domestic flights. A skeleton schedule and network would still have to be operated to cater for connections.

No need for this, if the airports are integrated into the rail network, right? Look at FRA-CGN. You can ride the high speed train right into the airport at FRA. No need for the CGN flight, even with connections. Trains carry LH flight numbers. Checked luggage will be loaded on the train. A Lufthansa flight attendant on the train. If you don't look out the window you'd think you are on your connecting flight! Only that it's quicker, and you can walk around and you have lots more space.

Soren  santahat 



All the things you probably hate about travelling are warm reminders that I'm home
User currently offlineCloudyapple From Hong Kong, joined Jul 2005, 2454 posts, RR: 10
Reply 6, posted (5 years 1 month 4 weeks 12 hours ago) and read 4550 times:

Wasn't it only a few weeks ago some study claimed rail travel was less efficient and more polluting then the plane?

The argument was that trains are run even if there are few (or none even) passengers on board. If it was a plane it would get cancelled or consolidated with another flight.



A310/A319/20/21/A332/3/A343/6/A388/B732/5/7/8/B742/S/4/B752/B763/B772/3/W/E145/J41/MD11/83/90
User currently offlineStandby87 From Switzerland, joined Jul 2001, 536 posts, RR: 3
Reply 7, posted (5 years 1 month 4 weeks 12 hours ago) and read 4549 times:

I think the last line of the Guardian's article sums it up

"Plus: how Europe left Britain behind in the era of fast trains"

For me the key word is Integration - a high-speed national railway should be linked with a world-class air transport infrastructure.

Neither of those 2 components is the case in the UK at present.
Years of neglect in the Thatcher Era (to be fair, the problems started with Mr Beeching and decisions NOT to electrify the rail network) and the madness of privatisation have done the damage.

It will take another 20 years to build a proper rail network in the UK.
Go to Frankfurt, Amsterdam, Paris or Switzerland to see how it should be done.


User currently offlineKennyk From United Kingdom, joined Apr 2005, 482 posts, RR: 0
Reply 8, posted (5 years 1 month 4 weeks 11 hours ago) and read 4434 times:

Britain, high speed trains, don't make me laugh.

There is no way by 2020 that the British rail network will be even slightly more expanded than it presently is. Political dithering will take to 2020 alone before they get around to doing anything, then 10 years of public inquiries because everyone wants railway expansion, but not in there back yard, another 10 years to do the engineering, make that 15 because it will be way late and way over budget and that takes us to around 2055 and to cap it all it will be inefficient, run by lazy unions who will strike at the drop of a hat because they will be able to hold the countries transport network to Ransom.

The reason we have to fly so much in the UK now is because the roads are choked up and the railways overloaded and overpriced. Yet again politicians are ranting because it sounds good. I travel very little by train because it is impractical where I live and I travel 1000 to 1500 miles a week by road all round the UK so I know what the roads are like, and I worked in railway engineering for a while so have some idea on that side.

The domestic flights in the UK are necessary because we have such a poor infrastructure and they are probably as green as motor transport and more importantly they work.


User currently offlineRdwootty From United Kingdom, joined Sep 2005, 904 posts, RR: 2
Reply 9, posted (5 years 1 month 4 weeks 11 hours ago) and read 4393 times:

Maybe the Minister has not tried to go from Bristol to Newcastle on a cross country train recently . I am sure even he would prefer an Easyjet flight in 1 hour. Especially if he had to change at Birmingham by taking the train and then stand for 3 hours because the " seat reservation computer has crashed"

User currently offlineAlasdair1982 From UK - Scotland, joined Mar 2008, 468 posts, RR: 0
Reply 10, posted (5 years 1 month 4 weeks 11 hours ago) and read 4393 times:



Quoting Kennyk (Reply 8):
There is no way by 2020 that the British rail network will be even slightly more expanded than it presently is

In England, maybe. But Scotland is way ahead with new lines and reopenings


User currently offlineAlasdair1982 From UK - Scotland, joined Mar 2008, 468 posts, RR: 0
Reply 11, posted (5 years 1 month 4 weeks 11 hours ago) and read 4361 times:



Quoting Rdwootty (Reply 9):
Maybe the Minister has not tried to go from Bristol to Newcastle on a cross country train recently . I am sure even he would prefer an Easyjet flight in 1 hour. Especially if he had to change at Birmingham by taking the train and then stand for 3 hours because the " seat reservation computer has crashed"

At least we have a minister, since taking up the job, has been VERY pro-rail, and shows no signs of letting the issue go. At least we no longer have to suffer the dithering idiots Hoon and Kelly


User currently offlineDavehammer From United Kingdom, joined Nov 2007, 472 posts, RR: 0
Reply 12, posted (5 years 1 month 4 weeks 10 hours ago) and read 4270 times:



Quoting Kaitak (Reply 1):
Rail services in the UK can be inefficient (i.e. late) and expensive

Punctuality is improving all the time to be honest. It's a whole lot better than it was.

Services to and from London aren't that bad. It's the journeys not involving London that are the problem. Until the excessive NIMBY association stop with this 'price of everything value of nothing' nonsense then neither aviation nor the railways will get the required investment.

As for opening lines in Scotland, it's excellent news. The Beeching act hit hardest in Scotland and its great to see some of them reopening. They don't add much to the national city to city issue though.


User currently offlineVV701 From United Kingdom, joined Aug 2005, 7569 posts, RR: 17
Reply 13, posted (5 years 1 month 4 weeks 7 hours ago) and read 4168 times:

Oh dear. More political spin:

'The transport secretary, Lord Adonis, said switching 46 million domestic air passengers a year to a multibillion-pound north-south rail line was "manifestly in the public interest".'

But the CAA reports that there were only 24,343,340 domestic air passengers (all routes) in 2008. So Lord Adonis is exaggerating the numbers by 89 per cent.

And Lord Adonis appears to have forgotten that the United Kingdom is part of the British Isles. So of those 24,343,340 passengers as many as 9,352,918 flew across water. The largest contribution to this number were passengers travelling between Northern Ireland and other parts of the UK. But the Isle of Man, the Scottish Islands and the Channel Islands all had significant numbers of domestic air passengers.

So discounting these 9,352,918 passengers we are down to 14,990,422. Now just how many of these want to travel along Lord Adonis's 'north-south rail line'. One half? One quarter? Or still fewer?

Lord Adonis plans to start with a high speed London to Birmingham line. So just how many passengers flew between London and Birmingham in 2008? Yes. Zero! But there were as many as 111 passengers out of his 46 million who flew either between LGW or SEN and BHX in 2007! Only another 45,999,889 to find!

Theoretically great. Practically either a non-starter, at least from a reducing-air-passenges perspective, or a total white elephant. And when you think about the protests that a few miles of the Newbury by-pass created what will a 100 mile London to Birmingham railway line driven staight - very straight - through the countryside and suburbia create?


User currently offlineMMEPHX From , joined Dec 1969, posts, RR:
Reply 14, posted (5 years 1 month 4 weeks 7 hours ago) and read 4137 times:



Quoting Standby87 (Reply 7):
For me the key word is Integration - a high-speed national railway should be linked with a world-class air transport infrastructure.

exactly, providing the ability to connect to flights and local/regional trains at LHR, LGW, BHX, MAN, GLA etc. via high speed rail will be a key to any success. If there was a visionary in the government somewhere, it is time to recognize that the separation of travel modes needs to end and become more integrated; the ability to drive to a convenient HSR station with plenty of (well lit and secure) parking, with a HS train to an international airport where the terminals are integrated with flights and other public transport modes in some manner would be a superb start.

Recognizing that this is also a complete pipe dream on my part and would likely cost hundreds of billions and take 50+ years to complete. The trouble with any large scale transport system is that it takes a decade or two to bring to fruition which is at complete odds with a politician who has to see re-election every 4-5 years. So in the end there isn't that much real support for the big picture integrated plan and some slapped together quick fix which gets the politco a few extra votes next year wins the day! (At least in the UK; the French, Germans, Dutch, Belgians etc. seem to take a much better long term view)

As for Adonis plan, I notice that the 7BnGBP price and 2020 date (who is he kidding - just getting Swampy out of the trees will take until 2019, and ask Adonis how long it has taken to get Crossrail started, and it is still years away from finishing) was just to get to the "West Midlands" and it might be a PPP. So it could end up where the money runs out and where it is cheapest to put the stations for the PPP and not actually go anywhere useful at all like say; BHX, New Street Station etc. In summary, the usual political BS with just about no real thought applied to it and doomed to failure, which is sad because the concept is not a bad one.


User currently offlineCubsrule From United States of America, joined May 2004, 23072 posts, RR: 20
Reply 15, posted (5 years 1 month 4 weeks 6 hours ago) and read 4112 times:



Quoting Joost (Reply 4):
I do think that a good, well-integrated LHR into the rail network, eliminates the need for domestic flights for a big part.

The key, I think, is the quality of the integration. If it's a FRA-type integration, then there will absolutely be less need for domestic flights. If it requires a long walk, dealing with checked bags at Heathrow, etc., though, it's a much different matter.



I can't decide whether I miss the tulip or the bowling shoe more
User currently offlineStandby87 From Switzerland, joined Jul 2001, 536 posts, RR: 3
Reply 16, posted (5 years 1 month 4 weeks ago) and read 4004 times:

Thanks MMEPHX - good thread this!

Here's today's article

http://www.guardian.co.uk/politics/2...05/railways-britain-neglect-trains

Something is wrong in the UK:
Zurich Airport with ca. 20 million passengers a year has 4 full-length train platforms suitable for Double-Decker trains.
LHR with 3 times as many passengers has nowhere near that Rail Capacity...


User currently offlineLarspl From Netherlands, joined Apr 2002, 473 posts, RR: 0
Reply 17, posted (5 years 1 month 4 weeks ago) and read 3978 times:

Does LHR really need the third runway? When that runway comes available British Airways has probably lost out to the other two big alliances on the main land...


facebook.com/ddaclassicairlines
User currently offlineB747-4U3 From United Kingdom, joined Jan 2002, 990 posts, RR: 0
Reply 18, posted (5 years 1 month 4 weeks ago) and read 3974 times:



Quoting Birdwatching (Reply 5):
No need for this, if the airports are integrated into the rail network, right? Look at FRA-CGN. You can ride the high speed train right into the airport at FRA. No need for the CGN flight, even with connections. Trains carry LH flight numbers. Checked luggage will be loaded on the train. A Lufthansa flight attendant on the train. If you don't look out the window you'd think you are on your connecting flight! Only that it's quicker, and you can walk around and you have lots more space.

They key to the success of that is the level of integration. Sadly, in the UK one would probably have to collect luggage, walk to the train, lift your luggage onto the train and then lift it off at the other end. That is obviously not pleasant or convenient. Unless the train works just like a connecting flight, it will not be able to replace domestic flights.

Quoting Joost (Reply 4):
Personally, I think ultra-high speed trains are a waste of money, compared to more traditional train services, say up to 200 km/h. Especially when the branches are not well developed.

The idea of this is to reduce domestic flights. Ultra-High Speed trains have significantly reduced domestic flights in Korea (KTX), Taiwan and Japan. If they weren't as high speed they probably wouldn't have been as successful as they are.

Quoting Rdwootty (Reply 9):
Maybe the Minister has not tried to go from Bristol to Newcastle on a cross country train recently

Maybe...but he did do that 5 day rail tour of the UK in Standard Class! He was also most upset that there was nowhere to buy a coffee at Southampton Station at 8pm.

Quoting Alasdair1982 (Reply 11):
At least we have a minister, since taking up the job, has been VERY pro-rail, and shows no signs of letting the issue go. At least we no longer have to suffer the dithering idiots Hoon and Kelly

Yes, I like his passion for the job. I think we need a high-speed rail network (as well as a third runway) and Lord Adonis seems to be really pushing the high-speed rail part as well as other improvements.

Quoting VV701 (Reply 13):
Practically either a non-starter, at least from a reducing-air-passenges perspective

Indeed, it might reduce domestic flights, but they will soon be replaced. If Heathrow is easier to get to, more people will use it as an alternative to their local airports.

Quoting VV701 (Reply 13):
And when you think about the protests that a few miles of the Newbury by-pass created what will a 100 mile London to Birmingham railway line driven staight - very straight - through the countryside and suburbia create?

I bet the people protesting about a tree being felled for this high-speed rail line will be the same green minded people who are in support of a high-speed rail line now.


User currently offlineCloudyapple From Hong Kong, joined Jul 2005, 2454 posts, RR: 10
Reply 19, posted (5 years 1 month 3 weeks 6 days 23 hours ago) and read 3921 times:



Quoting Standby87 (Reply 16):
Thanks MMEPHX - good thread this!

Here's today's article

http://www.guardian.co.uk/politics/2...05/railways-britain-neglect-trains

Something is wrong in the UK:
Zurich Airport with ca. 20 million passengers a year has 4 full-length train platforms suitable for Double-Decker trains.
LHR with 3 times as many passengers has nowhere near that Rail Capacity...



Quoting B747-4U3 (Reply 18):
Indeed, it might reduce domestic flights, but they will soon be replaced. If Heathrow is easier to get to, more people will use it as an alternative to their local airports.

The plan is for a highspeed rail hub to be built north of Heathrow on the Great Western Mainline. This hub will have connections to HS1, HS2, Heathrow Express/Connect, Airtrack, Great Western Mainline and the ex-Thames Train network, whatever it is called now.

I think it makes sense but the scale and cost of building it will mean it will take forever to come true.



A310/A319/20/21/A332/3/A343/6/A388/B732/5/7/8/B742/S/4/B752/B763/B772/3/W/E145/J41/MD11/83/90
User currently offlineIH8BY From United Kingdom, joined Jun 2005, 1142 posts, RR: 3
Reply 20, posted (5 years 1 month 3 weeks 6 days 23 hours ago) and read 3900 times:



Quoting Joost (Reply 4):
I think money can better be spent in really integrating LHR into the railway network as well as connecting several secondary cities to the network.

The problem is that you'd be integrating LHR into a rail network that can't really take it, and from that standpoint it wouldn't be competitive. In any case, how would you integrate it? The Heathrow branch currently links onto the Great Western Main Line; basing the route on the Cross Country Route, given that it takes around 6 hours to reach Edinburgh from Oxford at the moment, it'd take 7 from Heathrow. Hardly competitive. It's over 4 hours from King's Cross to Edinburgh too; try to link Heathrow to the East Coast Main Line and you might be there in 5h30.

Quoting Rdwootty (Reply 9):
Maybe the Minister has not tried to go from Bristol to Newcastle on a cross country train recently .

To be fair, the Cross Country Route is an individual case - at least there are direct trains between the two! CrossCountry trains take a very indirect route with a large number of stops - you only have to see the front of their timetables to see what I mean - and furthermore they are not the main operator on that route, meaning that they inevitably play second fiddle to other train operators.

Quoting Standby87 (Reply 16):
Something is wrong in the UK:
Zurich Airport with ca. 20 million passengers a year has 4 full-length train platforms suitable for Double-Decker trains.
LHR with 3 times as many passengers has nowhere near that Rail Capacity...

Double-decker trains are currently not feasible on UK passenger lines; the infrastructure can't support them.

My view is that the UK has been due a fundamental rail upgrade for the best part of the last thirty years. The infrastructure is old and the philosophy misguided; the development of the Advanced Passenger Train in the 1970s and 1980s is emblematic of this; it was an expensive stop-gap measure to avoid investing in proper high speed rail lines. Whilst Virgin's Pendolinos are all well and good, it's all still just making the best of a bad situation. Fed up though I am of sneering from other EU countries about the state of our railways, something needs to be done.

The construction of decent high speed lines to the North and on to Scotland is, I think, a higher priority for the country than the expansion of Heathrow, not least because the benefits will be spread across the country and thus compliment nicely the regeneration of Northern cities. Cutting the journey to Newcastle to under two hours and Manchester to just over an hour would generate business, and a decent connection to Heathrow would add the benefit of cutting domestic air travel. Two lines could do this: London-Leeds-Newcastle-Edinburgh, and London-Birmingham-Manchester-Glasgow.



Have you ever felt like you could float into the sky / like the laws of physics simply don't apply?
User currently offlineAirbusA6 From United Kingdom, joined Apr 2005, 2013 posts, RR: 0
Reply 21, posted (5 years 1 month 3 weeks 6 days 22 hours ago) and read 3793 times:

How much domestic air travel is there to replace?

Just taking a London centric view

London-BHX doesn't exist, so while it would be great to take a high speed train (I went up to Brum for the cricket on Monday) and would ease traffic a bit, it would make zero difference to short haul flights. A direct link from Birmingham to LHR might decimate BHX airport as well...

London-MAN has already been directly affected by the rail upgrades (the Virgin trains aren't very comfortable but 2 hours isn't bad, and unless you're connecting to LHR/LGW much faster than flying)

London-Yorkshire, is hardly a major air route, most people take the train or drive,

London-Newcastle - some potential for switching from flying.

London-GLA/EDI will have a higher proportion of internal flights, but then this will be the last part (if ever) to be connected to a high speed network anyway, so the airlines will have at least another 20 years without high speed competition.

London-INV/ABD - see GLA/EDI (but more so), the sparse population makes rail travel very scenic, but never a candidate for serious high speed rail.



it's the bus to stansted (now renamed national express a4 to ruin my username)
User currently offlineHumberside From United Kingdom, joined Dec 2005, 4922 posts, RR: 4
Reply 22, posted (5 years 1 month 3 weeks 6 days 20 hours ago) and read 3580 times:



Quoting Cloudyapple (Reply 19):
The plan is for a highspeed rail hub to be built north of Heathrow on the Great Western Mainline. This hub will have connections to HS1, HS2, Heathrow Express/Connect, Airtrack, Great Western Mainline and the ex-Thames Train network, whatever it is called now.

Offically anyway nothing has been proposed as far as a route is concerned. High Speed 2, a DfT company is investigating options for the route between London and Birmingham, and how to integrate Heathrow into that

There has even been suggestions (forget who by) of the London terminus being at Wormwood Scrubs/Old Oak Common in West London, with connections into Central London/Heathrow by Crossrail. Hoping that idea isn't taken up

BTW - Thames Trains is now part of the same franchise at the Great Western Mainline, First Great Western



Visit the Air Humberside Website and Forum
User currently offlineBabybus From , joined Dec 1969, posts, RR:
Reply 23, posted (5 years 1 month 3 weeks 6 days 20 hours ago) and read 3522 times:



Quoting Kennyk (Reply 8):
The reason we have to fly so much in the UK now is because the roads are choked up and the railways overloaded and overpriced.

And you forgot to mention that the railway system collapses to a halt every Sunday with engineering works. That really bugs me. I pay for a train and end up on a bus.

A friend of mine from Manchester told me recently that his rail ticket to London in the morning cost his company 340 pounds! He got a flight for just over 100 pounds.

And they want us to take the train?  Yeah sure


User currently offlineCHRISBA777ER From UK - England, joined Mar 2001, 5964 posts, RR: 62
Reply 24, posted (5 years 1 month 3 weeks 6 days 19 hours ago) and read 3331 times:

This is utter bollocks.

Nobody in this country is interested in a new rail link in reality no matter how much they bleat about it in theory. The public outcry about the building of it will be just deafening - no politician in his right mind would sanction it, although he'll make all the nice noises about being bothered about investment etc.

In theory i absolutely agree with the proposal - we shouldnt be flying LHR-MAN etc - we should be driving or taking the train, but the trains have to work, run on time and be cheaper than the plane.

In reality to actually build the thing will take 30 years and cost tens of billions more than it needs to because of the state of this country and the idiots who live here who want everything cheaper but are not prepared to accept that sacrifices need to be made. We should be talking about a new T6 and a fourth or fifth runway at LHR if this country was serious about transport policy and keeping LHR as the major hub for world travel into and outside of Europe, but there are too many votes to be lost by paying it anything other than blind lip service.

I fecking hate this country and the self-serving media whore scum who "run" it, and the media scum who actually Run it.

I'm moving to Singapore in September and I cant wait.



What do you mean you dont have any bourbon? Do you know how far it is to Houston? What kind of airline is this???
25 Sydaircargo : totally agree, they should get rid of all the domestic flight in germany as well, would free up a lot of slots. and a hight speed train connection in
26 Standby87 : LOL! From one ex-Pat Brit (Colombia, South Korea, Taiwan and now Switzerland) to another about-to-be ex-Pat, I give you an Old Chinese saying: "Be ca
27 BCAL : I certainly do not. By next June there will be a change of government and by this time Adonis' dream will have barely made the drawing board. Private
28 Humberside : But the Conservatives back high speed rail too
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...
Security Checks On UK Domestic Flights posted Wed Jul 4 2007 23:29:17 by Boysteve
UAL To Cut 12% Of Domestic Flights - Axe 68 Jets posted Wed Oct 6 2004 14:00:48 by BestWestern
UK Transport Minister To Airlines: Stop Winging posted Fri Jul 17 2009 15:42:42 by Danfearn77
Aus-NZ 'domestic' Flights: August Announcement posted Wed May 13 2009 20:23:45 by QF744
Which NW/DL Domestic Flights To Be Consolidated posted Tue Mar 31 2009 16:36:26 by Slcdeltarumd11
LAN Ecuador Domestic Flights Now Bookable posted Thu Mar 26 2009 03:27:02 by SCL767
UK Enviro Czar Wants To Ration Holidays posted Mon Feb 9 2009 15:37:03 by DLPMMM
Domestic Flights From Liverpool And Blackpool posted Tue Jan 6 2009 11:19:50 by Raid1wa
LAN Ecuador Approved To Begin Domestic Flights posted Wed Dec 24 2008 22:37:19 by SCL767
Air Zimbabwe Domestic Flights Question posted Sat Nov 8 2008 16:57:35 by Cchan