The Great Train VS Plane debate

bigjulie · Post by **bigjulie** » 30 Oct 2005, 00:12

Comet wrote:
I have no happy memories of public transport in Paris at all

It seem's to me, you have no happy memories of any kind of public transport

Comet · Post by **Comet** » 30 Oct 2005, 11:47

bigjulie wrote:
Comet wrote:
I have no happy memories of public transport in Paris at all
It seem's to me, you have no happy memories of any kind of public transport

Oh dear - obviously not read all my VLM, SNBA, Sabena etc flight reports. Or how much I have liked travelling on the Belgian double deckers hauled by the heavy duties. Or how much nicer the rubber things are than British trains. Or how nice the stoptrein ride from Verviers to Spa is. Or how I liked domestic flying by Fokker prop in Iceland.

heathrow · Post by **heathrow** » 30 Oct 2005, 17:58

It's still cheaper to fly from London to Paris than to take the Eurostar. And if you're willing to make the drive to STN or LTN, you can get to ORY or CDG pretty cheap with Easyjet. I'd rather fly somewhere than take the train. People argue that you don't get the scenery when you fly, but it really isn't about that. You can see for miles up in the sky. I had to take a train from Toronto to Dorval, and I begged my mum to let me fly, but she wouldn't. Flying is exciting. It's thrilling no matter how far you go. A train is just....boring. It's longer, and you're only moving forward! Flying ALL the way

vc-10 · Post by **vc-10** » 01 Nov 2005, 22:28

Vinnie-Winnie, why do prefer to fly on your trips to Reading? if you take the Eurostar from Brussels to London Waterloo, and then a train to Reading. They are about every 15 mins I think, some stoppers but some quite quick, only 20 mins. I think there is a Bus from Heathrow to reading, could be wrong (might be Basingstoke) and I think it costs about £10, which is a lot more than the train from London the Reading.
HSTs would make my life a lot easier. Taking the train is very convenient here, even if it has service that is worse than anything else I have ever experienced (Vinnie-Winnie will know about my rants!)
I love flying, but domesticaly and for short distances trains are much better. I would love to see better UK-Europe HST links, the old Regional Eurostar idea should make a comeback. We should build lines from London to Edinburgh, Glasgow, Bristol etc where we already have HSTs(Intercity 125s, know here as HSTs, despite the fact that they very rarely get up to their top speed of 125mph, and they are old and diesel). The Voyagers etc can then be cascaded onto other lines, which do not have the traffic to be completely replaced, like London-Salisbury-Exeter, which at the moment has Class 159 Sprinters that are horrible. The A/C units leak water from the roof, the seats are uncomfortable, the shake under acceleration, they are noisey.........and the Class 170 Turbostar, which are better but still uncomfortable and diesel!!!!!:(:(:(:(

Vinnie-Winnie · Post by **Vinnie-Winnie** » 01 Nov 2005, 23:18

vc-10 wrote:Vinnie-Winnie, why do prefer to fly on your trips to Reading? if you take the Eurostar from Brussels to London Waterloo, and then a train to Reading. They are about every 15 mins I think, some stoppers but some quite quick, only 20 mins. I think there is a Bus from Heathrow to reading, could be wrong (might be Basingstoke) and I think it costs about £10, which is a lot more than the train from London the Reading.

Well, apart from the delays, here is some further explanation why after 3 years I basically went 75% of the time by plane:

Usually, I took my stuff back home, meaning that I wanted to have the easiest trip as possible (Had at least 25 kilos to carry each time!) So as you said, could have switched platforms and take a direct train to RDG. Problem is, the service is very slow and takes about 1H30 , stops at every station, trains are not very comfortable and since it crosses busy lines has many delays!
So this was a no-go for me. Therefore, whenever it was too late to book a cheap flight, I took the underground to Paddington then a HST to RDG! Far quicker although You can imagine a pain in the a*** with luggage.

The easiest way to to travel was to to hop on a Plane in Brussels, land at Heathrow (tried Gatwick once for fun) and take the direct Heathrow airlink to Reading. this service takes about 35 minutes and at about 10 pounds each way, was a bit cheaper and far quicker than travelling by train (Underground + train ticket about 13 pounds, really can't remember!)

vc-10 wrote:HSTs would make my life a lot easier. Taking the train is very convenient here, even if it has service that is worse than anything else I have ever experienced (Vinnie-Winnie will know about my rants!)
I love flying, but domesticaly and for short distances trains are much better. I would love to see better UK-Europe HST links, the old Regional Eurostar idea should make a comeback. We should build lines from London to Edinburgh, Glasgow, Bristol etc where we already have HSTs(Intercity 125s, know here as HSTs, despite the fact that they very rarely get up to their top speed of 125mph, and they are old and diesel). The Voyagers etc can then be cascaded onto other lines, which do not have the traffic to be completely replaced, like London-Salisbury-Exeter, which at the moment has Class 159 Sprinters that are horrible. The A/C units leak water from the roof, the seats are uncomfortable, the shake under acceleration, they are noisey.........and the Class 170 Turbostar, which are better but still uncomfortable and diesel!!!!!:(:(:(:(

Your ideas definitely don't come cheap! 50 billion pounds at least considering that land-prices are outrageously expensive and the fact that certain areas are totally build-up! And although you seem to distrust the studies made about Eurostar links to northern studies I believe they were 100% correct! I don't know if they had predicted low-cost airlines in the reports they made but that would have killed off the links to and from Paris and Brussels anyway!

Also electrification might make more sense now that petrol prices are so expensive but again it would cost billions to do this. Better spend the money available in more clever ways by upgrading infrastructure that really needs it! Train companies should really consider replacing HST which indeed are getting rather old by new more reliable trains which unfortunately they haven't done yet.

It all comes down to this though: people would rather drive somewhere than take the train! So why invest massively in infrastructure which only a limited amount of people will use. Commuter train lines to and from cities need to be upgraded that's for sure. pretty long distance lines too. But let's be honest in the countryside it just doesn't pass any cost/benefit analysis!
Finally leave the trips to mainland europe to airlines! If you include the channel tunnel cost + the losses Eurostar makes in might not have been worthwile building this link at the taxpayer expense.

Bloody hell so many replies I would like to comment on!

Comet · Post by **Comet** » 02 Nov 2005, 09:47

London to Edinburgh, Glasgow, Bristol etc where we already have HSTs(Intercity 125s, know here as HSTs, despite the fact that they very rarely get up to their top speed of 125mph, and they are old and diesel).

On the London-Edinburgh service, operated by GNER, you see mostly electric trains, the old diesel IC125 is rarely seen on that route nowadays! Many 125s are now operated by Midland Mainline from Sheffield to London, and they have a reputation for being crap. The Virgin Voyager, though a nice train, has endless technical problems.

And the less said about that horrendous piece of engineering under the Channel the better! What better way to introduce rabies to a once rabies free country than to build a tunnel linking it to a country where rabies is endemic in the wildlife population!

Post by **sn26567** » 02 Nov 2005, 18:26

Comet wrote:And the less said about that horrendous piece of engineering under the Channel the better! What better way to introduce rabies to a once rabies free country than to build a tunnel linking it to a country where rabies is endemic in the wildlife population!

Horrendous piece of engineering? I call it (and I am an engineer) a masterpiece of engineering! I agree that on the financial side it is a disaster, but so was the Suez Canal...

And the Eurostar (try it once in your life, Louise) is a pleasure to travel with.

And I still do not know of one single animal that bought rabies to England through the Chunnel. It could happen on a ferry or a plane as well, now that the UK has abolished the quarantine.

vc-10 · Post by **vc-10** » 02 Nov 2005, 20:28

Eurostar is great. Much more room than a jetliner. Midland mainline now is getting things called Class 222 Meridians, based on the Bombardier 220/221 Voyager/Super Voyager. I do not know if they tilt, but Midland Mainline might get some that do if they do not. The new Seimens Class 444/450 Desiro trains from London Waterloo to Southampton/Portsmouth are great, and Vinnie-whinnie can take one from Waterloo to Reading if he books his ticket correctly. When I went on the 5-WES (the predessesor to the Desiros) from Waterloo to Reading to connect with my train to Salisbury, I found that it was very quick. They do not stop at the little stations. Some trains to portsmouth are Suburban 450s (Blue http://www.semg.org.uk/gallery/class450_01.html) which do stop, however. The Expresses are White http://www.semg.org.uk/gallery/class444_01.html
The Diesel Class 159 Super Sprinter http://www.the-siding.co.uk/class159/pages/159atdaw.htm and Class 170 http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/List_of_UK ... _Companies (scroll down) which operate to Salisbury and exeter from London Waterloo, but can be unreliable (if you go on one go on a 170, see my previous post)
The First Great Western HSTs are very good, BTW.

Post by **sn26567** » 03 Nov 2005, 13:03

vc-10 wrote:Eurostar is great. Much more room than a jetliner.

Give me back Eurostar anytime. I flew LHR-BRU on BA this morning, and I can tell you that the Eurostar is way more comfortable than even the A319 I flew this morning, let alone the B737.

Vinnie-Winnie · Post by **Vinnie-Winnie** » 03 Nov 2005, 13:58

sn26567 wrote:Give me back Eurostar anytime. I flew LHR-BRU on BA this morning, and I can tell you that the Eurostar is way more comfortable than even the A319 I flew this morning, let alone the B737.

As you told us before no wonder you would rather take the train since work actually allows you to go first class! 8)

Well vc-10, maybe since I left the UK (August 2004) things have changed! But I would still rather take a HST from Reading to London! They are quick, quit comfortable and the noise they make is just amazing! HST's also have priority on the great western line which is not necessarily the case for the RDG to WAT (let's adopt airline codes shall we?

) line!

In the meantime I am really wondering where I will go in the UK next time.... Since work doesn't allow me to travel will probs take the cheapest option which should be the train! If anyone can help me getting a place in the jump-seat will go by plane! Still prefer it for my channel crossing

chornedsnorkack · Post by **chornedsnorkack** » 03 Nov 2005, 15:03

Vinnie-Winnie wrote:
sn26567 wrote:Give me back Eurostar anytime. I flew LHR-BRU on BA this morning, and I can tell you that the Eurostar is way more comfortable than even the A319 I flew this morning, let alone the B737.
As you told us before no wonder you would rather take the train since work actually allows you to go first class! 8)

Which class?

A big difference is the narrower, er, fuselage of Eurostar compared to short-haul planes. The Standard seating on Eurostar is 4 abreast, 2-2, compared to the mainline narrowbodies, where both A32x and B737 are 6 abreast, 3-3. A fairer comparison would be the jets like E170 or CRJ, which have 2-2 in Coach.

The Eurostar First Class is 3 abreast 2-1. Do airlines offer competitive shorthaul First, or is it all standard seating?

V-Bird · Post by **V-Bird** » 03 Nov 2005, 15:43

What I like on the HST trains ( and i travel allot with the ICE ) is the onboard service. Its crazy. Lot`s of airliners are decrease there onboard services, the ST operators increase there onboard services. When i take in the morning the ICE from Aachen to Frankfurt via Cologne, i always take a great breakfast, with eggs and bacon, fresh prepared, nice hot coffee ), i can read almost every world newspaper, i can plug in my laptop, so that he can load his battery, i can use internet ( without extra charge ) i am allowed to make a call in great seats. When i arrive in Frankfurt, i just have to walk 15 minutes to the office. I don't have to wait for my luggage, and take an cab to the office. When i go home i have a great diner aboard the ICE ( you can choose between several menu`s ) and when i would like to have an beer, i go to the Bar / Bistro car and buy one. And with an speed of 300 km/h ( between Frankfurt and Cologne ) and 250klm/h ( between Cologne and Aachen ) i am within 2.5 hours back home.

So I take the train instead of plane

an-148 · Post by **an-148** » 03 Nov 2005, 16:09

I agree with you, dear Oecher.
Merzbrueck would have difficulties to accept much bigger than a C206

Joke by side, I had also opportunity to take both Thalys from CDG and ICE3 from FRA to Liege and therefore totally agree on this point: as long as Euregio'er (Aachen, Liege, Maastricht) have to drive to BRU or CGN to have a plane, the solution of HST for short or middle range will be the very first one!

chornedsnorkack · Post by **chornedsnorkack** » 03 Nov 2005, 16:43

V-Bird wrote: I don't have to wait for my luggage, and take an cab to the office.

Which I think is related to the fuselage cross-section of trains!

Planes have to be circular or at least heavily rounded because of the pressure.

Trains are roughly oblong in cross-section.

So the planes must have cramped cabins and underfloor cargo hold for baggage that cannot be in cabin and has to be checked. Trains have a flat floor, no cargo holds and liberal cabin luggage allowance...

V-Bird · Post by **V-Bird** » 03 Nov 2005, 16:57

chornedsnorkack wrote:
V-Bird wrote: . Trains have a flat floor, no cargo holds and liberal cabin luggage allowance...

Well, both Thalys and ICE has in every car a luggage compartment. Idd they have an flat floot, but most system are installed under the floor! And i just read on the internet that the ICE has an pressure cabin... ( why i don't know )

Vinnie-Winnie · Post by **Vinnie-Winnie** » 03 Nov 2005, 19:27

V-Bird wrote:Well, both Thalys and ICE has in every car a luggage compartment. Idd they have an flat floot, but most system are installed under the floor! And i just read on the internet that the ICE has an pressure cabin... ( why i don't know )

Well it depends what you mean by systems: the electrical system are well hidden above and below the floor, but for the engines, it's a different matter, especially if you compare the ICE3 with the Thalys!

The ICE3 has its engines repartitioned all along the train, which enables the ICE to hold many more passengers I believe. On the other hand, the Thalys has 2 motor units, so 2 out of the 10 carriages can't actually be used because the engines are located there!

Unfortunately I have never been able to go on a ICE3. Very unfortunate because I would love to be seated in carriage one just behind the driver. Since the driver is only separated from the passenger by a window, U can actually see things happening as if you were driving yourself! On a plane you got to ask and most of the time the pilots just refuses...

chornedsnorkack · Post by **chornedsnorkack** » 04 Nov 2005, 09:22

V-Bird wrote:
chornedsnorkack wrote:
V-Bird wrote: . Trains have a flat floor, no cargo holds and liberal cabin luggage allowance...
Well, both Thalys and ICE has in every car a luggage compartment.
And some planes have luggage compartments in cabin, I mean one end of cabin with larger storage shelves where the passengers can leave luggage when entering.
V-Bird wrote: Idd they have an flat floot, but most system are installed under the floor! And i just read on the internet that the ICE has an pressure cabin... ( why i don't know )

Well, I think there are some problems entering and exiting tunnels at a great speed.

vc-10 · Post by **vc-10** » 04 Nov 2005, 16:21

On the First Great Western Intercity 125s (aka the HST) there can be very little lugage space. I went on one to Cornwall from Exeter and had a lot of problems finding a seat and space for luggage. The problem is that the train operating companies try to squeeze every single drop of revenue from each service, so lugage is not a priority. The same happens on the Super Sprinters aswell.
The ICE will not need the pressure in the cabin to be that much above normal, whereas an Airliner has air inside the cabin at about double the outside air presure.