steph001
Posts: 297
Joined: Wed Oct 08, 2003 8:21 pm

Flights Replaced By High Speed Trains

Sun Nov 23, 2003 12:13 am

In Germany LH has tends to replace short flights from or to FRA (as FRA-STR, FRA-CGN) by high speed trains. The time of travel to or from FRA remains about the same. I know also that Air France does that on CDG-BRU. Is this only an European approach , or are there similar tendencies / concepts elsewhere around the world?
 
brubiac
Posts: 215
Joined: Sat Nov 22, 2003 4:24 am

RE: Flights Replaced By High Speed Trains

Sun Nov 23, 2003 12:43 am

SNBA will start soon also with the highspeedtrain between BRU - CDG. It's much cheaper to operate.

SNBA operates only 1 flight a day between BRU and CDG. The aircraft departs at BRU for a positioningflight to CDG, than came back with pax. Then they did a pax flight back to CDG and came afterwards back empty as a positioningflight. Never understood why.
BRU a small airport in a big world.
 
steph001
Posts: 297
Joined: Wed Oct 08, 2003 8:21 pm

RE: Flights Replaced By High Speed Trains

Sun Nov 23, 2003 1:20 am

Brubiac: the demand on BRU-CDG should be greater than one flight a day. What happened? Are the business people traveling with Thalys?
 
desertjets
Posts: 7563
Joined: Fri Feb 18, 2000 3:12 pm

RE: Flights Replaced By High Speed Trains

Sun Nov 23, 2003 2:03 am

The distances in intracity markets in Europe is relatively short. A good high speed train should easily beat the plane. Also factor in that the train stations are often in or close to the city centers, whereas airports are not. Couple the time spent with security, travel time to/from the airport and those added transit costs, the train can often come out ahead.

In the US Amtrak's Northeast Corridor services (Northeast direct, Superliner, and Acela Regional/Express) competes well with the airlines shuttle services. The fact that both coexist with relatively large operations says a lot. But the airlines have an advantage that DCA, LGA, and BOS are REALLY close to the central business district and have decent transit options available as well.
Stop drop and roll will not save you in hell. --- seen on a church marque in rural Virginia
 
VCE
Posts: 575
Joined: Mon Sep 15, 2003 8:31 pm

RE: Flights Replaced By High Speed Trains

Sun Nov 23, 2003 2:17 am

Also in Italy (except for trips longer than 700km where to take a flight is anyway more convenient) the high speed train is more used. For a simple reason: to catch the train it's necessary to go to the central stations, to take a plane you need sometime to go at 40km out of the city.
 
VCE
Posts: 575
Joined: Mon Sep 15, 2003 8:31 pm

RE: Flights Replaced By High Speed Trains

Sun Nov 23, 2003 2:37 am

In Italy the Government has approved in 2001 a program of investments regarding the high speed train network. Within 2007-2008 the nowadays high speed train network should be doubled, and Italy should have the largest European high speed train network.

http://www.tav.it

 
RJ100
Posts: 3895
Joined: Wed Nov 22, 2000 1:37 am

RE: Flights Replaced By High Speed Trains

Sun Nov 23, 2003 2:54 am

There is the so-called "FlugZug" between Basel and Zurich airport, an hourly connection that goes directly to Zurich airport (while the other trains go to Zurich's main station).

Journey time is approx. 45 minutes while the SWISS flight takes 30 minutes (without check-in etc.)

I would like to see more flights though  Big grin

RJ100
none
 
bmacleod
Posts: 2443
Joined: Sat Aug 25, 2001 3:10 am

RE: Flights Replaced By High Speed Trains

Sun Nov 23, 2003 3:12 am

By 2010, the London-Paris route could fall to high-speed train service, with more trains going through the "chunnel."

[Edited 2003-11-22 19:15:02]
The engine is the heart of an airplane, but the pilot is its soul.
 
dw747400
Posts: 1091
Joined: Wed Aug 15, 2001 8:24 am

RE: Flights Replaced By High Speed Trains

Sun Nov 23, 2003 3:14 am

Regarding the high-speed service in the Northeast of the US...

The new Acela trains are certainly impressive, but they are still limited to speeds of roughly 125 miles per hour or less for the majority of the route due to the need of the rail line to wind around a variety of obstacles. Even with more centralized stations and a much more streamlined check-in procedure, the trains are hard pressed to beat airplanes time-wise on routes much over 150 or 200 miles. Thus, going from Washingtn, D.C. to Philadelphia may be faster on the train for a businessman, going from DC to Boston is still faster by plane.

On top of this, the Acela is extremely expensive. Amtrak made a huge investment in their network to get it up-and-running, and thus the prices are steep. A ticket on a shuttle flight in the Northeast is often cheaper than taking the train, especially if you are willing to take an LCC. The price to go from Washington to NYC can be 5 to 10 times Southwest’s rates from BWI to Long Island.
CFI--Certfied Freakin Idiot
 
StevenUhl777
Posts: 3281
Joined: Sun Jul 08, 2001 11:02 am

RE: Flights Replaced By High Speed Trains

Sun Nov 23, 2003 3:17 am

The US is way behind Europe in this regard..

Eventually, I would expect a bullet train-type operation between SEA and YVR, SEA and PDX, PDX and EUG, LAX-SAN, MIA-MCO, and maybe ORD-MKE. I'm sure there's many other possible candidates. Will it completely replace flights? I doubt it.
And the winner for best actress is....REESE WITHERSPOON for 'Walk the Line'!!!!!!!!
 
matt777
Posts: 476
Joined: Wed Oct 24, 2001 8:55 am

RE: Flights Replaced By High Speed Trains

Sun Nov 23, 2003 3:29 am

HAHA, today it appeared a good article in the italian newspaper Corriere della Sera about the Milan-Rome route via High Speed EuroStar Trains or Plane. They are reducing the times with new investments. It has gone down from 4:30 to 3:50 hs.  Big thumbs up
 
VCE
Posts: 575
Joined: Mon Sep 15, 2003 8:31 pm

RE: Flights Replaced By High Speed Trains

Sun Nov 23, 2003 3:38 am

Yes Mati. The Italian Government approved in 2001 a program of 100 billions of Euro of investments in infrastructures. 28 billions of Euro are regarding the high speed train network.
 
FlyPIJets
Posts: 825
Joined: Sat Oct 11, 2003 3:32 am

RE: Flights Replaced By High Speed Trains

Sun Nov 23, 2003 4:55 am

I suspect the bullet train in Japan substitutes for a lot of domestic air service.

But, I'm not sure directly. Here's what I mean. I have noticed that some internet booking engines are actually offering a rail leg for a city pair flight. I have only seen this when booking to Europe. Are airlines in Europe now "code sharing" with rail?
Rex Kramer: Get that finger out of your ear! You don't know where that finger's been!
 
donder10
Posts: 6944
Joined: Sun Oct 21, 2001 5:29 am

RE: Flights Replaced By High Speed Trains

Sun Nov 23, 2003 5:56 am

Are airlines in Europe now "code sharing" with rail?
Yes,AF and LH in particular,AFAIK.
 
lehpron
Posts: 6846
Joined: Tue Jul 10, 2001 3:42 am

RE: Flights Replaced By High Speed Trains

Sun Nov 23, 2003 6:12 am

so is the rail industry stealing from the airline market place? Obviously trains will not travel on eternity bridges over oceans anytime soon...

Maybe that is why the US is behind the world with respect to high-speed trains, Boeing's short haul fleets would die and they lobby against rail transportation; hence most of their lead in front of Airbus.
The meaning of life is curiosity; we were put on this planet to explore opportunities.
 
Qb001
Posts: 1923
Joined: Fri Apr 28, 2000 12:42 am

RE: Flights Replaced By High Speed Trains

Sun Nov 23, 2003 7:22 am

There are at least 20 "corridors" in North America worth having a high-speed train infrastructure. Bombardier is now investing in the "JetTrain", which is powered by a jet engine, to tackle these markets.

In fact, high-speed trains, with a speed of 125 mph (200 km/h), which is the speed limit considering the state of the rail infrastructures in North America, is a much better choice for distances less than 300 miles (500 km). For instance, YUL-YYZ, LAX-SAN, ORD-STL or DFW-IAH are perfect examples of city pairs that could be much better served by high speed trains than by flights.

It would also free up many precious slots at busy airports that could be put to a better use and probably delay for many years, maybe forever, heavy investments in new terminals, new runways, etc.
Never let the facts get in the way of a good theory.
 
MAH4546
Posts: 24521
Joined: Wed Jan 24, 2001 1:44 pm

RE: Flights Replaced By High Speed Trains

Sun Nov 23, 2003 8:04 am

The Acela is hardly high-speed. America's first high-speed train system, the Florida "Overland Express" is ready to roll. It will run between Miami and Tampa via Orlando, with more routes to follow. The Orlando-Tampa route has been chosen, and Bombardier will be the train supplier. Construction is set to start within a few months.

There is no airline service between Orlando and Tampa, way too short a distance, but it will give airlines a real run for thier money on the very busy Miami-Orlando and Miami-Tampa corridors.

Though it should still be noted that compared to what Japan and Europe have, the new Florida system is yet again, at the bottom of the defintion of high-speed rail.

More info:
http://www.floridahighspeedrail.org/
a.
 
srbmod
Posts: 15446
Joined: Tue Mar 20, 2001 1:32 pm

RE: Flights Replaced By High Speed Trains

Sun Nov 23, 2003 8:17 am

In order for Acela to compete with the Northeast air shuttles, the costs for the needed improvements to the rail infrastructure alone is over $1 Billion, and the gov't is not exactly willing to pay out that kind of money to an entity that has failed to turn a profit since its' creation.
 
Goose
Posts: 1771
Joined: Thu Aug 21, 2003 3:40 am

RE: Flights Replaced By High Speed Trains

Sun Nov 23, 2003 8:32 am

*shrug* In many places, trains are not looked upon as replacements for flights, but for car traffic - much like mass transit in a major city looks to a light rail system to supplement or enhance bus services and road networks.
"Talk to me, Goose..."
 
airbazar
Posts: 6799
Joined: Wed Sep 10, 2003 11:12 pm

RE: Flights Replaced By High Speed Trains

Sun Nov 23, 2003 8:53 am

There will never be high-speed trains in the US for 2 main reasons:
1) Americans don't like government subsidized businesses and you can't have good public transportation without government subsidies. Pick any country with good rail and public transportation, they're all heavily subsidized.
2) Gasoline is too cheap in the US and it's not going to go up any time soon.
Again, look at countries with good public transportation and compare their gasoline prices with ours.

Acela is not High Speed train. For most of the journey between Boston and NYC it only breaks 100mph for a brief period of time. When you factor in the stops and getting to/from the station, I can drive from Boston to NYC faster than the train. It takes me 3.5 hours door-to-door.
 
FlySSC
Posts: 5179
Joined: Tue Aug 12, 2003 1:38 am

RE: Flights Replaced By High Speed Trains

Sun Nov 23, 2003 9:22 am

Most of the people on this forum don't understand why the LCC are not so popular in France, and why there is no French domestic LCC. Most of you think that AF is responsible for this situation, as it is supposed to be "protected" by the government.
The reality is different and much more simple :
The TGV (High speed train) is the biggest competitor on the short distances...and the first TGV line in France (PARIS-LYON) was inaugurated more than 20 years ago : in 1981.
Today it takes 1h45mn to go from Paris downtown to Lyon downtown, the flight between ORY and LYS is 55 mn, add to this the Check-in time, the time to go to ORLY airport, and then From LYS-St Exupery to the city.
The TGV now goes to Marseille (2h45mn from Paris ), to Lille (55mn), to Bordeaux, Nantes, etc...

Look what is going on now between Paris and Brussel : a Thalys TGV every 30 minutes from 7AM to 9PM...
No doubt that the plane can't compete under a 3 hours ride.
The TGV will soon go from Paris to AMS, CGN, SXB from LYON to MILAN, and when the tracks will be operational for full speed all the way on the British side, it should take less than 2h30 to go from LONDON to PARIS...

According to serious sources, British Airways is reported to be joining a consortium to fund a high speed Eurostar Rail route from Heathrow to Paris. This would free up a significant number of slots at both LHR and CDG where high-speed train rail links to AMS and BRU relieve pressure on slots.
AF is studying the same thing between London and CDG airport...
 
planemaker
Posts: 5411
Joined: Mon Aug 25, 2003 12:53 pm

RE: Flights Replaced By High Speed Trains

Sun Nov 23, 2003 10:04 am

ADP sees efficiency as key to countering rail competition
Kurt Hofmann, Paris (21Nov03)

French airports authority Aeroport de Paris (ADP) has identified improving efficiency as central to countering increased competition, notably from the planned growth of high-speed international rail links.

ADP operates the Paris airports of Charles de Gaulle, Orly and Le Bourget, and chief executive Hubert de Mesnil is aware of the likely impact of an expanding high-speed rail network from the French capital.

“The fact that, in a timeframe of about 10 years, TGV trains will be running from Paris to cities like Barcelona and Amsterdam, [means] we will lose passengers to ground [transport], because people won’t accept long journeys to [the airport] and long waiting times inside airports.”

He believes to compete with this and other competitive threats, ADP needs to improve efficiency.

For example he points to a need to improve transport links connecting Charles de Gaulle to the city. Around 80% of passengers currently arrive at Charles de Gaulle via private car, and a high-speed rail link to the city is unlikely before 2010.

At Orly, ADP will modify the terminal for domestic shuttle flights to cut waiting times for passengers. “If we gain just five minutes less waiting time, that helps us against the TGV,” he says.

ADP is also targeting faster processes on the ground to help meet the needs at Charles de Gaulle of its biggest customer, Air France. “Just 60% of all Air France flights can board passengers via airbridges,” he says. “We have to increase that to 85% in three or four years at the latest.”

Future developments will also reflect the dual-hub policy adopted by Air France with new partner KLM and its Amsterdam hub. “So far we don’t know how the merger between Air France and KLM will look,” says Mesnil. “We had our first meetings with Schiphol Airport to find out what the consequences are for us and how we maybe can work together.”

While the Dutch authorities insisted on assurances of a continued prominent role for Schiphol within the alliance, Mesnil himself notes that the Charles de Gaulle could also find itself facing increased competition. “If Amsterdam Airport is working more efficiently than Charles de Gaulle, so the Dutch airport could have more business,” he says.


Nationalism is an infantile disease. It is the measles of mankind. - A. Einstein
 
bobrayner
Posts: 2038
Joined: Sun Apr 27, 2003 8:03 am

RE: Flights Replaced By High Speed Trains

Sun Nov 23, 2003 10:15 am

Brubiac: the demand on BRU-CDG should be greater than one flight a day. What happened? Are the business people traveling with Thalys?

It is a compromise. SN Brussels had to arrange for the Thalys route to be extended from central Brussel out to BRU. I think they are, effectively, leasing a trailer. They could add frequencies, but only a small number of Paris trains would normally terminate in Brussel - other trains also go on to other destinations, and therefore it would be less convenient to send them to BRU too.

In future it would be nice (on the map) to route Brussels-Köln trains via the airport, but services are shared with DB; who are very proud of their 1 hour service from Köln to FRA, and friendly with LH.

Even without the SN Brussels/Thalys deal, it's trivial for travellers to get any Thalys from CDG to the centre of Brussels, then change onto a train to the airport.

are there similar tendencies / concepts elsewhere around the world?

Eurostar would very much like to control the London-Paris and London - Brussels markets. There's currently a price war. Eventually, one of the airlines will pull out - unless Eurostar runs out of money first - then we could expect a codeshare to either CDG or Paris Nord.

According to serious sources, British Airways is reported to be joining a consortium to fund a high speed Eurostar Rail route from Heathrow to Paris.

They would rather eat their own children, surely? Even BA would be scared by the cost of an HST line (mostly underground) from the CTRL to LHR.

They would happily to lobby for (perhaps have some involvement in) Crossrail from LHR to Stratford. A while ago, before St Pancras became such a magnet for improved services, and when Crossrail was still stuck on the drawing board (which it still may be), they were lobbying hard for an LHR-Waterloo shuttle.

Which serious sources?
Cunning linguist
 
planemaker
Posts: 5411
Joined: Mon Aug 25, 2003 12:53 pm

RE: Flights Replaced By High Speed Trains

Sun Nov 23, 2003 10:47 am

Amadeus to provide distribution services for Eurostar
Victoria Moores, London (24Jul03)


Competition between rail and air services is set to intensify following the introduction of Amadeus as the global distribution service (GDS) for Channel Tunnel train operator Eurostar.

Under the new distribution agreement the high-speed rail provider’s schedules will be presented in exactly the same way as airline data, enabling travel agents to compare Eurostar routes and competing air services directly.

The booking process for the train service will also be identical to the airline model, with the system using regular air-travel commands and the automated airline ticketing standard ATB2.

Competition between rail and air services has intensified since the emergence of low-cost airlines. The opening of a Eurostar fast-line in the UK this autumn, enabling the trains to travel at their maximum speed, will only add to the fray.

Using the new line, trains on the London-Paris route will take just over 2h 30min while the duration of London-Brussels will be 2h 20min.

The cross-over between the two modes has intensified in recent years with Eurostar offering interline agreements on its services; partners include British Airways (BA), Virgin Atlantic, US Airways and Korean Air.

Amadeus, which is primarily owned by Air France, Iberia and Lufthansa, is currently developing its presence in the sector and has 18 existing rail customers.

Nationalism is an infantile disease. It is the measles of mankind. - A. Einstein
 
qantas747
Posts: 239
Joined: Wed Mar 29, 2000 12:51 pm

RE: Flights Replaced By High Speed Trains

Sun Nov 23, 2003 2:58 pm

I was reading a train magazine in Australia, about the Lettrain they are trialling in the US. With the eye for upgraded rail infrastructure, and establishment of hisgh speed rail in OZ mainly between SYD-CBR and SYD-MEL with and eye for extending to BNE and ADL. But australia is a big country and planes are jstified in this end of the world. But its great to see them using aircraft technology inb rail services. The only other downside to VHST is that they tend to be expensive. eg. the Shinkansen system in Japan, is very, very efficient,and me being a tourist having a JR Pass, wazs cost effective. But some of the prices werew like 10000 Yen for short s4ectors, in Japan, this is normal, but in other places around the world air travel could continue to be cheaper, hence the age of LCC
 
JetRanger2000
Posts: 227
Joined: Sun Feb 13, 2000 8:21 am

RE: Flights Replaced By High Speed Trains

Sun Nov 23, 2003 3:13 pm

Grenoble to Paris is a good one.
 
caribb
Posts: 1502
Joined: Mon Nov 08, 1999 6:33 am

RE: Flights Replaced By High Speed Trains

Sun Nov 23, 2003 3:19 pm

If I look at my neck of the woods in Canada the most logical route for a TGV styled train is the Quebec City-Windsor corridor that basically includes Montreal, Ottawa and Toronto. It's been discussed for years as a possibility however the winters in Quebec are particlarly harsh especially with regards to the ground freezing therby making rolling stock very expensive to maintain because the freezing and thawing motion physically moves the track. Thus the reluctance to invest in a high speed track. I'm not sure if this is still a problem today but so far the talk hasn't amounted to anything beyond that.

In theory though if you include getting ready at home, getting to the airport, checking in at suggested times prior to your flight, going through security, expecting normal delays, flight time, deplaning in Toronto, waiting for luggage and getting a taxi into downtown Toronto then the total time it takes to go between Montreal and Toronto could be up to 7 hours even though the actual flight time is only 45 minutes to 1 hour. A car trip is around 6 hours from door to door with traffic delays possible at both ends. The TGV could make the trip downtown to downtown in about 4-5 hours plus add in about 0-60 minutes to get to downtown at the start depending where you live.. so in the end the plane ride might actually be one of the slowest ways to get to the other city even if the longest part of the trip is covered in the shortest period of time. For sure a high speed train would be competitve but unfortunately North Americans have never had the pleasure of a truely successful European styled rail system. Our trains are slow and old by comparison and the rail networks very limited.


[Edited 2003-11-23 07:27:41]
 
gigneil
Posts: 14133
Joined: Fri Nov 08, 2002 10:25 am

RE: Flights Replaced By High Speed Trains

Sun Nov 23, 2003 3:21 pm

The Acela is hardly high-speed.

Compared to the previous train infrastructure, the Acela Express is warp-speed.

It is extremely limited, however with the additional security at DCA and LGA people are choosing it more and more each day, and paying more for it.

N
 
lehpron
Posts: 6846
Joined: Tue Jul 10, 2001 3:42 am

RE: Flights Replaced By High Speed Trains

Sun Nov 23, 2003 6:13 pm

" and the gov't is not exactly willing to pay out that kind of money to an entity that has failed to turn a profit since its' creation. "

They set themselves up for that failure by insisting on an existing track that had so many crossings and stops that it screwed up the time savings. They should put their foot in their mouth. Like ther are most interested in saving on development costs rather than operational and maintenance costs, look what the TGV and Transrapid systems did and look at the US obcession with packing all the technology in one experiment and getting it right the first time, real cheap. Right, like that is gonna work.  Yeah sure

This crap can explain away a lot of aviation and space cancalations in this country. Like why couldn't NASA make the X-43 before the X-30 and take small steps, I donno. Why could Boeing make a military version of the sonic cruiser before going public with a commercial white elephant, I donno. Had Airbus began development of a Concorde successor rather than A380, I'd give them their gravestone now.
The meaning of life is curiosity; we were put on this planet to explore opportunities.
 
Adam T.
Posts: 796
Joined: Mon Jun 05, 2000 7:01 am

RE: Flights Replaced By High Speed Trains

Sun Nov 23, 2003 11:18 pm

Correct me if i'm wrong, but wasn't their plans to extend the Acela or make a route that would connect to in DC? I live in CLT, and I seem to remember hearing talk a few years ago about a high speed train running from DC to Atlanta with stops in Richmond, Raleigh, Charlotte, and Greenville. The plan was turned down as I remember it.
Adam
 
Moolies
Posts: 476
Joined: Fri Nov 07, 2003 2:59 am

RE: Flights Replaced By High Speed Trains

Mon Nov 24, 2003 12:00 am

The Eurostar is going on a price drive to "end" flights between LON-PARIS once and for all.

How successful they will be is another story but in a few years it will be interesting to see.

I think the airport taxes play a major part as sometimes they are more expensive than the actual flight which cant be too good for AF and BA.
 
brubiac
Posts: 215
Joined: Sat Nov 22, 2003 4:24 am

RE: Flights Replaced By High Speed Trains

Mon Nov 24, 2003 12:55 am

Steph001: This 1 daily flight is only for SNBA. This flight is only to pick up connection passengers from CDG to their African destinations.

AF is offering more frequencies to CDG with the Thalys, I think every hour 1 train. Not sure of that.
BRU a small airport in a big world.
 
Alessandro
Posts: 4962
Joined: Wed Sep 12, 2001 3:13 am

RE: Flights Replaced By High Speed Trains

Mon Nov 24, 2003 1:07 am

The Gothenburg-Stockholm route in Sweden has definitly been taking traffic from domestic airlines.
From New Yorqatar to Califarbia...
 
Moolies
Posts: 476
Joined: Fri Nov 07, 2003 2:59 am

RE: Flights Replaced By High Speed Trains

Mon Nov 24, 2003 1:45 am

The thing of going to the airport and checking in and blah blah is a huge time waste.

The train generally goes to the city centre and you dont have to be there that long before to check in. and the service is generally just as good if not better.
 
Goose
Posts: 1771
Joined: Thu Aug 21, 2003 3:40 am

RE: Flights Replaced By High Speed Trains

Mon Nov 24, 2003 2:13 am

Security measures at train stations and onboard trains are usually more subtle and less time-consuming as well. Aside from a biological or chemical attack in a station, there really is not much threat on-board a train - a would-be terrorist cannot hijack the Acela and demand to be taken to Cuba  Big grin
"Talk to me, Goose..."
 
airbazar
Posts: 6799
Joined: Wed Sep 10, 2003 11:12 pm

RE: Flights Replaced By High Speed Trains

Mon Nov 24, 2003 2:55 am

Gigneil
The Acela is not much faster than what we had before. It only shaved off 30 minutes of travel time between Boston and NYC. Hardly warp-speed as you put it.

Moolies
In the US there's not much advantage to the train going to the city center because not only do most people live in the suburbs. A lot of jobs are also in the suburbs. Where there are not train stations. Often the traffic congestion to get to/from a train station downtown is far worse than going to the airport which is usually located outside the city. Ence the reason why it works between BOS and NYC. It's as hard to get to the train as it is to get to the airport in both cities  Smile
 
killerbabe
Posts: 185
Joined: Tue Aug 05, 2003 3:47 am

RE: Flights Replaced By High Speed Trains

Mon Nov 24, 2003 3:11 am

Its the truth within Europe.
Amsterdam- to Brussels and Paris are already active and routes to Frankfurt, Hamburg and Berlin are planned.
Other European country's are going on the same way, special in Germany and France
 
petertenthije
Posts: 3256
Joined: Tue Jul 10, 2001 10:00 pm

RE: Flights Replaced By High Speed Trains

Mon Nov 24, 2003 3:23 am

Goose: Security measures at train stations and onboard trains are usually more subtle and less time-consuming as well. Aside from a biological or chemical attack in a station, there really is not much threat on-board a train - a would-be terrorist cannot hijack the Acela and demand to be taken to Cuba

Actually, trains have been highjacked in the past. In the Netherlands during the 70s there where 2 or 3 such highjackings. They stopped the train in the middle of an open field and held the passengers and crew hostage.

The Eurostar has full airport-style security measures. X-ray screening and advance check in. At least half an hour in advance.
Attamottamotta!
 
AMS
Posts: 1620
Joined: Thu Aug 14, 2003 7:34 am

RE: Flights Replaced By High Speed Trains

Mon Nov 24, 2003 4:00 am

Yes, also between BRU-AMS there are KLM flight numbers operated by Thalys
I think Thalys will have to adopt to the same security proc as the Eurostar.

 
steph001
Posts: 297
Joined: Wed Oct 08, 2003 8:21 pm

RE: Flights Replaced By High Speed Trains

Mon Nov 24, 2003 4:27 am

Seems that high speedtrains are replacing short flights only in Europe. As some of you may know,railway companies in Europe are state-owned and have a monopoly in their own country. Do you think it is possible that railway companies increase prices on the routes where they replace planes when plane traffic isn't competing with them on these routes? I don't say that transferring short-haul traffic from airport to trains does not make sense at all, but shouldn't we (in Europe) first have a viable competition on the rail unless we give up short-haul flights?
 
Socrates17
Posts: 54
Joined: Sun Sep 28, 2003 3:47 am

RE: Flights Replaced By High Speed Trains

Mon Nov 24, 2003 4:47 am

The Acela is staggeringly expensive and hugely disappointing. With a relatively small amount of time spent searching, I could get to Paris from Newark for only slightly above the price charged by Acela from Newark to Washington DC. I live in the New Jersey suburbs and intra-suburban public transport (i.e. not into or out of Manhattan) is a bad joke. It is faster and easier for me to get to EWR by driving and parking than it is to Newark Penn Station (the closest departure station.)

Since I was a train geek long before I became a civil air geek, I was planning a visit to friends in Arizona by train. I could get from Newark to Flagstaff (without a sleeper) at a lower fare than the Acela fare from Newark to DC.

Acela is in serious danger of pricing itself out of the market for a sub-par product HST. A good L.C.C. shuttle could kill it once the novelty wears off.
You Can't Take the Sky from Me
 
bobrayner
Posts: 2038
Joined: Sun Apr 27, 2003 8:03 am

RE: Flights Replaced By High Speed Trains

Mon Nov 24, 2003 5:54 am

The Eurostar is going on a price drive to "end" flights between LON-PARIS once and for all.

How successful they will be is another story but in a few years it will be interesting to see.


Until the time as there are actually trains from (for instance) LHR to Paris, there will remain substantial demand for flights. Eurostar can (and does) dominate O&D, but for a traveller arriving in LHR from Elbonia en route to Paris, a short shuttle flight is much more appealing than getting on a train into central London, then 1 or 2 Tube trains to Waterloo/St Pancras, then Eurostar...

railway companies in Europe are state-owned and have a monopoly in their own country

Some are, some aren't. Of course, the railway companies themselves have been the fiercest opponents of European legislation removing ownership controls, monopolies, &c. We already have a limited form of "open rails" for freight; over the next few years, various other rules come into force.

Several HST routes with immense potential have been held back (or underexploited) by inefficient monopoly train operators. The least efficient (and least agile) operators would have most to lose from liberalisation; I don't have to remind you which countries most opposed "open rails".  Big grin
Cunning linguist
 
VCE
Posts: 575
Joined: Mon Sep 15, 2003 8:31 pm

RE: Flights Replaced By High Speed Trains

Mon Nov 24, 2003 10:15 am

The shuttle route Milan-Rome that nowadays see more than 100 daily flights per day and it's one of the busiest in Europe surely will have a strong negative impact when the Italian Eurostar of the new generation will enter in service with the new line in 2006. Today the Eurostar service between Rome and Milan covers the distance in 4h and half, with the entrance in 2006 of the new one the distance will be covered in 3h and 15 with a speed in some points at 370km/h (Milan-Bologna). Also the Milan-Paris routes will have a strong competition when the TGV-Eurostar line will be completed with the new tunnel under the Alps.
 
User avatar
RayChuang
Posts: 7982
Joined: Sat Jun 24, 2000 7:43 am

RE: Flights Replaced By High Speed Trains

Mon Nov 24, 2003 2:17 pm

Here's the big reason why high-speed trains can be a viable alternative in Europe and in Japan: the distances between major population centers is short enough and passenger patronage high enough that high-speed train travel is quite viable.

This is a major problem here in the USA--the distances between major population centers are much, much further than in Europe and Japan. As a result, construction costs will be exorbitant, and it may not be a viable idea west of the Mississippi River.

If high-speed rail is to be truly viable in the USA, they really need to make maglev technology economically practical. Once that happens, the speed of maglev trains (at least 500 km/h or 310 mph) makes it possible to cover the the long distances between cities in the USA much easier. At these speeds, we could build lines from Chicago to these areas:

Minneapolis-St. Paul, MN via Milwaukee, WI, Madison, WI, and Eau Claire, WI
Omaha, NE via Rockford, IL, Davenport, IA, and Des Moines, IA
Kansas City, MO via Champaign, IL and St. Louis, MO
Cincinnati, OH via Indianapolis, IN
Detroit, MI via Gary, IN, Grand Rapids, MI and Lansing, MI
Buffalo, NY via Gary, IN, South Bend, IN, Toledo, OH, Cleveland, OH, and Erie, PA

Also, with maglev trains we aren't limited to trains of a certain width due to considerations for standard gauge rolling stock--they could be as much as 25-30% wider, which means more comfortable seating for all classes of seating on the train.
 
steph001
Posts: 297
Joined: Wed Oct 08, 2003 8:21 pm

RE: Flights Replaced By High Speed Trains

Mon Nov 24, 2003 6:45 pm

Do you think there may be a viable competition between two railway companies , if both are state-owned? I would feel much better if not only the big ones would compete (if they'll do it) on high-speed routes.
I would also like to see LCC on the European railway system , maybe not serving Frankfurt to Cologne, but linking some suburbs of those big cities at a much lower price than the German Rail does. I would also like to notice that the German Rail has significantly reduced prices on some internal routes only after they have got competition from LCC's (dBA, formerly Deutsche BA), so I don't think we should favor any of the transportation means as long as they have no real competition.
 
JGPH1A
Posts: 15080
Joined: Thu Aug 14, 2003 4:36 pm

RE: Flights Replaced By High Speed Trains

Mon Nov 24, 2003 7:01 pm

The TGV line is due to be extended from Grenoble direct to Nice sometime in 2009, which would reduce train times NCE-PAR to 3hrs 45 I think. I don't know if this is the same line as PAR-MIL (I guess it could be).
Young and beautiful and thin and gorgeous AND BANNED ! Cya at airspaceonline.com, losers
 
zonks
Posts: 156
Joined: Mon Nov 24, 2003 5:24 pm

RE: Flights Replaced By High Speed Trains

Mon Nov 24, 2003 8:22 pm

The Chinese government is investing a lot of money into a new high speed rail line to go between Beijing & Shanghai. I don't know if the government is looking at a goal of eliminating air services between the two cities, but surely they're looking at a reduction of air services. I don't have the specifics, but maybe some of our members who reside in Asia do.

While on paper, HKG - CAN flights seem like they should be eliminated due to train travel, I think most people who fly that sector are coming from/going to Taiwan. Most Hong Kongers/Mainlanders who travel between Hong Kong & Guangzhou take a bus or train, anyway.
 
N766UA
Posts: 7843
Joined: Thu Jul 29, 1999 3:50 am

RE: Flights Replaced By High Speed Trains

Mon Nov 24, 2003 8:41 pm

This is funny because I just heard Adam Corolla on the radio show "Loveline" complaining about trains. He said he's sick of Southwest and wants a train between LA and Las Vegas. Appearantly they've been talking about it forever and he's kind of sick of it. If you've heard Adam, you know how he can rant about things for awhile, and that made for a hilarious show.
This Website Censors Me
 
HlywdCatft
Posts: 5232
Joined: Mon Jan 29, 2001 6:21 am

RE: Flights Replaced By High Speed Trains

Mon Nov 24, 2003 10:35 pm

Amtrak has been trying to do one between Detroit and Chicago for years also. They have some that travel about 70-80 mph, but I dont think anything goes over 100 yet.
 
JGPH1A
Posts: 15080
Joined: Thu Aug 14, 2003 4:36 pm

RE: Flights Replaced By High Speed Trains

Mon Nov 24, 2003 10:45 pm

I read an article once that the new airport for Las Vegas would be built miles out of town and would be connected to LV and LA via High Speed train - it was in Flight International I think, but it was some time ago.
Young and beautiful and thin and gorgeous AND BANNED ! Cya at airspaceonline.com, losers

Who is online

Users browsing this forum: Amiga500, AsiaTravel, Baidu [Spider], BlueSky1976, castmember, GCT64, greenjetav, Heavierthanair, johnberg, jonchan627, KarelXWB, miguelco, MSNbot Media, Noshow, Phen, qf789, sassiciai, shorni346, Smoketrails, zkanz and 320 guests