Short-haul Flights in the UK could be curtailed
Join Date: Feb 2007
Location: Bristol, UK
Age: 39
Posts: 58
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
Living in the Netherlands and keeping a home also in Scarborough in the UK , I regularly , in the past , flew good old BAW from DUS to MAN and then took the train . Lately , due to the security fiasco (in MAN) I have used the Rotterdam-Hull car ferry - bonus , I have wheels (though I walk everywhere) and am able to bring stuff back BUT it is also cheaper , generally . HOWEVER , from Nov. 14th , Eurostar will go to St Pancras in London , then a short step to Kings Cross and heyho up to York , change and on to Scarborough . BUT , one cannot book a through ticket - even though there is now RailTeam for travel throughout Europe . So , I have to book train to Brussels , then Eurostar to London and then London to Scarborough . Travel is still cheaper than any other method - if one books early enough but what happens with delays through the separate bookings ? When the railway systems of Europe get their acts together (a through ticket within Europe) it will be great , until then travel is easier but much burocratic - just like the EU !
Join Date: Jul 2005
Location: Ask OPS!
Posts: 1,078
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
747-436 Has it!
If only domestic flights were to be taxed then the majority of the short haul fleet in the uk would link through Amsterdam, Rotterdam, Brussels etc. etc. etc.
Carry double passenger loads on bigger aircraft and avoid the 'domestic' taxes.
Not only that is it really going to stop 'casual' flyers? When they discover it's cheaper to fly to Malaga than Manchester? As usual the ill thought out plans of headline grabbing politicians will curtail business travel, overstretch our already creaking public transport system and cr*p road infrastructure and make us the laughing stock of Europe.
Why has aviation become this global menace all of a sudden? Have a look at shipping for mass tonnes of CO2 emmisions. Once again it's just an easy target and something else the 'government' can try to make Joe Bloggs feel guilty about so they can tax us further on it. Taxing aviation fuel will just lead to aircraft 'tanking in' fuel, therefore flying heavier and more in-efficiently. And where has all of the new 'Passenger Tax' gone? Into improving the environment? Improving public transport and transport links? Who knows?
Time to leave, last one out turn out the lights
If only domestic flights were to be taxed then the majority of the short haul fleet in the uk would link through Amsterdam, Rotterdam, Brussels etc. etc. etc.
Carry double passenger loads on bigger aircraft and avoid the 'domestic' taxes.
Not only that is it really going to stop 'casual' flyers? When they discover it's cheaper to fly to Malaga than Manchester? As usual the ill thought out plans of headline grabbing politicians will curtail business travel, overstretch our already creaking public transport system and cr*p road infrastructure and make us the laughing stock of Europe.
Why has aviation become this global menace all of a sudden? Have a look at shipping for mass tonnes of CO2 emmisions. Once again it's just an easy target and something else the 'government' can try to make Joe Bloggs feel guilty about so they can tax us further on it. Taxing aviation fuel will just lead to aircraft 'tanking in' fuel, therefore flying heavier and more in-efficiently. And where has all of the new 'Passenger Tax' gone? Into improving the environment? Improving public transport and transport links? Who knows?
Time to leave, last one out turn out the lights
Join Date: May 2003
Location: UK
Posts: 109
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
The published figures for the 787 (2.4lt /100 passenger km) equate to 117 mpg – as good as a hybrid carrying two passengers. It might seem better than the intercity train but those figures are for long-haul. Consider the fuel used on the ground at LHR; consider the 3X multiplier for emissions at altitude; the comparison quickly fails. If carbon emissions are the issue the bus will have everything beaten.
Safety and security might be an issue – compare the fatality risks – car:3 ; bus:0.2 ; train:0.1 ; air:0.01 but how long before some terrorist takes a look at the Virgin Cumbria rail crash and realises that five minutes with a Stihl saw could be much more effective than gas cylinders at an airport?
The passenger will decide on convenience as well as cost – the biggest issue with UK short haul is much more likely to be the airport hassle than any carbon tax.
When will the airlines realise how easy it would be to counter the carbon crusaders? The cost to offset 260 tonnes of CO2 is just £70 using very “PR friendly” deforestation. Become carbon neutral and then see how quickly the political tune changes.
The real problem is the disinformation and downright lies that go unchallenged:
http://www.carboncalculator.co.uk/averages.php showing a pie chart with the average person using 34% of their carbon in air travel and only 16% for electricity – and this is supposed to be a University! Shipping - thats so insignificant it's not even shown
Safety and security might be an issue – compare the fatality risks – car:3 ; bus:0.2 ; train:0.1 ; air:0.01 but how long before some terrorist takes a look at the Virgin Cumbria rail crash and realises that five minutes with a Stihl saw could be much more effective than gas cylinders at an airport?
The passenger will decide on convenience as well as cost – the biggest issue with UK short haul is much more likely to be the airport hassle than any carbon tax.
When will the airlines realise how easy it would be to counter the carbon crusaders? The cost to offset 260 tonnes of CO2 is just £70 using very “PR friendly” deforestation. Become carbon neutral and then see how quickly the political tune changes.
The real problem is the disinformation and downright lies that go unchallenged:
http://www.carboncalculator.co.uk/averages.php showing a pie chart with the average person using 34% of their carbon in air travel and only 16% for electricity – and this is supposed to be a University! Shipping - thats so insignificant it's not even shown
Join Date: Apr 1999
Posts: 235
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
I can't believe we have arrived at this discussion!
By viewing this site we are the ones who should be most positive about aviation, and yet here we are considering alternative modes of transport. And having recently been positionned around Europe to work at other bases I agree! The hassle of check-in, security, boarding scrum, ATC slots, Immigration, Baggage delays and then hotel transport made me think I'm not doing this next time, I'll find another way.
By viewing this site we are the ones who should be most positive about aviation, and yet here we are considering alternative modes of transport. And having recently been positionned around Europe to work at other bases I agree! The hassle of check-in, security, boarding scrum, ATC slots, Immigration, Baggage delays and then hotel transport made me think I'm not doing this next time, I'll find another way.
Join Date: Jun 1999
Location: uk
Posts: 102
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
We should stop flying.........
BusBoy,We are "considering alternative modes of transport" as our enemies force us to explain why our mode is better than the alternative.
As I mentioned before in the past;
We should stop flying for 2 complete weeks everywhere in the world, in order to show the enemy what the world might look like without aviation.
This could be organised as we could all take the same 2 weeks off next summer, the world over.
The question is, are we good enough to defend aviation, or are we just too pathetic and lethargic?
Join Date: Oct 2006
Location: I live like a gypsy.
Posts: 105
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
Basically this Air Departure Duty is just good old Labour envy. It is no different than taxing 4X4 vehicles more.
However we should remember that it was a Tory Chancellor, Ken Clarke, who thought it a good wheeze to introduce ADD.
The nonsense in all this is that transit passengers create just as much pollution as a joining passenger, but do not have this pernicious duty levied on them. This whole 'Green' thing is just rubbish anyway.
Go tell it to the Chinese and Indians.
However we should remember that it was a Tory Chancellor, Ken Clarke, who thought it a good wheeze to introduce ADD.
The nonsense in all this is that transit passengers create just as much pollution as a joining passenger, but do not have this pernicious duty levied on them. This whole 'Green' thing is just rubbish anyway.
Go tell it to the Chinese and Indians.
Join Date: May 2003
Location: UK
Posts: 109
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
The nonsense in all this is that transit passengers create just as much pollution as a joining passenger, but do not have this pernicious duty levied on them.
Go tell it to the Chinese and Indians
The real problem is burning rainforest - that produces more CO2 each year than the whole of the USA - and also destroys its CO2 removal and O2 & water production.
Join Date: Jun 2004
Location: Surrounding the localizer
Posts: 2,200
Likes: 0
Received 2 Likes
on
1 Post
Bill.....I thought new vegetation absorbed up to 3 times as much C02 as mature vegetation...so shouldn't we cut down all the rainforests, and grow them back?
Brits "addicted" to cheap flights
And there's more:-
Addiction?
I really cannot believe that an erudite body such as Exeter University has bothered to poll people in this manner - isn't it like saying Brits are addicted to motor cars, electricity etc......
Addiction?
I really cannot believe that an erudite body such as Exeter University has bothered to poll people in this manner - isn't it like saying Brits are addicted to motor cars, electricity etc......
I do the trip from Edinburgh to SW London regularly too. On average, the train trip is 30 mins longer door to door. Public transport at the London end is crap for both methods, at Edinburgh it's a 10min bus ride or a £6.00 cab fare.
Prices tend to be similar unless you book months ahead, where the train wins.
But at least on the train you can work, relax, walk about and get food. And the scenery can be beautiful.
So you pay your money and you take your choice.
The airports and the train stations are equally unpleasant.
Prices tend to be similar unless you book months ahead, where the train wins.
But at least on the train you can work, relax, walk about and get food. And the scenery can be beautiful.
So you pay your money and you take your choice.
The airports and the train stations are equally unpleasant.
Join Date: Jan 2002
Location: Essex
Posts: 62
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
Severely curtailing domestic flights is not a realistic option. The rail network does not have the capacity to absorb all the passengers currently flying. It would need additional tracks on the major trunk routes - that is just not feasible in a country where available land is so restricted (particularly in the south-east). The French have built an impressive TGV network, but it has been on completely new tracks. The new Channel Tunnel Eurostar link is all we are likely ever to see.
For the last 20 years I have travelled frequently between Scotland and the South of England. I used to fly sometimes but drive more frequently. After some terrible road journeys I vowed never to drive again to Scotland. For the last 10 years I have flown and occaisionally used the train. I tried driving again a few months ago and quickly realised it was a mistake. North of Manchester was no problem but had numerous delays in the southern part of the journey in both directions. I was totally frazzled by the end. The rail journeys have generally been reasonably on time but the big problem is overcrowding. Eeven if I have a reserved seat I am often hemmed in by lots of people standing/sitting in the aisles. On average the rail fare is twice what I would have paid by air.
So for me I will continue to fly and hope that the present and future governments do not tax domestic air travel excessively. There is just not a viable alternative.
For the last 20 years I have travelled frequently between Scotland and the South of England. I used to fly sometimes but drive more frequently. After some terrible road journeys I vowed never to drive again to Scotland. For the last 10 years I have flown and occaisionally used the train. I tried driving again a few months ago and quickly realised it was a mistake. North of Manchester was no problem but had numerous delays in the southern part of the journey in both directions. I was totally frazzled by the end. The rail journeys have generally been reasonably on time but the big problem is overcrowding. Eeven if I have a reserved seat I am often hemmed in by lots of people standing/sitting in the aisles. On average the rail fare is twice what I would have paid by air.
So for me I will continue to fly and hope that the present and future governments do not tax domestic air travel excessively. There is just not a viable alternative.
Join Date: May 2003
Location: UK
Posts: 109
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
I thought new vegetation absorbed up to 3 times as much C02 as mature vegetation...so shouldn't we cut down all the rainforests, and grow them back?
Takes a long time to grow a 20 tonne tree! Consider the weight of a acre of rainforest - much of it carbon - that's where the conservative estimate of 260 tonnes per acre comes from.
An interesting fact:
In the next 24 hours, deforestation will release as much CO2 into the atmosphere as 8 million people flying from London to New York. That’s about 100 acres cleared every minute to create farmland for crops such as soya or palm oil, or for cattle ranching.
This is the sort of information we should be putting out to counter the environmental crusaders - those that are actually doing so much long term damage to the environmental cause with their incorrect information and attacks on aviation.
Unfortunately we cannot just expect this to go away - political parties are vying with each other to get the "green" vote. Children are being persuaded that flying will kill their future world.
It is only by educating with the correct science that we can counter this attack. The industry has to realise that it has to fight back.
Last edited by BillS; 30th Aug 2007 at 20:08. Reason: added link
Apache for HEMS - Strafe those Survivors!
Join Date: Jan 2001
Location: uk
Posts: 120
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
BillS
Like you I fail to understand why the airlines are not taking full page adverts in the papers and getting themselves airtime to publicise the facts, you almost begin to believe that they want to just stand and watch as the whole industry goes down the toilet..or maybe the management/pr types are really so stupid they think it will all blow over. They couldn't be that dim..could they?!
Like you I fail to understand why the airlines are not taking full page adverts in the papers and getting themselves airtime to publicise the facts, you almost begin to believe that they want to just stand and watch as the whole industry goes down the toilet..or maybe the management/pr types are really so stupid they think it will all blow over. They couldn't be that dim..could they?!
Join Date: Oct 2006
Location: I live like a gypsy.
Posts: 105
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
RYANAIR has 180 odd 737's on order and EASYJET are taking delivery of a new AIRBUS every 12 days on average...then Gordon Brown doubles Air Departure Duty, plus five interest rate rises and the airlines become the whipping boys for the 'Green' lobby.
What a monumental own goal to destroy such a successful industry.
I suppose next this Labour government will give permission for a third runway at Heathrow. What startling hypocrisy.
Whilst there is no tax on aviation fuel, it is being paid via ADD. At least the aviation industry contributes to the coffers of the treasury..unlike railways, which would not survive without their enormous subsidies.
However the airlines have only themselves to blame. Air fares are too cheap and the government has seen an opportunity to cash in.
What a monumental own goal to destroy such a successful industry.
I suppose next this Labour government will give permission for a third runway at Heathrow. What startling hypocrisy.
Whilst there is no tax on aviation fuel, it is being paid via ADD. At least the aviation industry contributes to the coffers of the treasury..unlike railways, which would not survive without their enormous subsidies.
However the airlines have only themselves to blame. Air fares are too cheap and the government has seen an opportunity to cash in.
Join Date: Aug 2000
Location: Dunedin, NZ
Posts: 280
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
Is this a subject where aviation is not going to win? Aviation people say that aviation contributes only 3% of CO2 gases. Some people say that aviation will generate some 5% of all CO2 gases by 2050. How is that figure arrived at? By 2050 the airlines will be operating a plane that replaces the 787 - Compare the 787 planes that were new 43 years ago - 707s, Tridents, Il-62s.
Also planes' gases are worse because planes are up in the sky. Is it possible to disagree with scientists who make these claims? Is water vapour bad?
Aviation people should not have a go at agriculture either, because the people who are going after aviation will want to introduce compulsory meat-free days as well.
Also planes' gases are worse because planes are up in the sky. Is it possible to disagree with scientists who make these claims? Is water vapour bad?
Aviation people should not have a go at agriculture either, because the people who are going after aviation will want to introduce compulsory meat-free days as well.
Join Date: Oct 2006
Location: I live like a gypsy.
Posts: 105
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
As an earlier contributor said, when the Thames stopped freezing over for the annual ice fair, no one thought it was anything to do with their coal fires. Yet winters turned so mild in the early 1900's, that convalescing soldiers from the Western Front were sunbathing on the beaches at Eastbourne and Brighton.
The airline industry in the UK has outgrown its infrastructure. How stupid in the past to build new 'international' airports with just one runway. The decision 30 years ago not to build a new airport in the Thames estuary will be an epitath to spineless indecision by politicians. They are very quick at ruthless opportunism to jack up taxes on the back of alleged environmental concerns, but decisions which keep the golden goose laying the eggs are put off.
Actually I hope the travelling public do boycott the 'budget' airlines. They alone are responsible for this 'backlash' and giving aviation a bad name. Pay and conditions, except for pilots of course, are rubbish.
If the amount of money over the years given to private railway companies for the sake of political dogma, had been given to a single integrated British Rail network, we would have the world's best railway system. Again it is the fault of politicians who did not see the need for a fast train network, unlike France and the rest of Europe.
How ridiculous as well to sell off your prime airports to one organisation for the sake of profit. What a staggering ideologically conceived mistake by the Tories.
One moment you have ex Environment Minister David Miliband slagging off Prince Charles over flying to New York with his entourage to collect an environment award, yet before the ink is dry in the newspapers, Miliband sits in a Club seat with his entourage on a BA 747-400 for an environment conference in Delhi!
The low cost airlines saw an opportunity and now this Labour government is reigning them in. The same will happen in Germany too where the Green lobby is very strong. But at least the Germans are getting on with some sort of replacement via a TGV style high speed rail service between all its major cities. Nothing like this going on in the UK. Just the usual home grown bashing of successful businesses and industry's.
The airline industry in the UK has outgrown its infrastructure. How stupid in the past to build new 'international' airports with just one runway. The decision 30 years ago not to build a new airport in the Thames estuary will be an epitath to spineless indecision by politicians. They are very quick at ruthless opportunism to jack up taxes on the back of alleged environmental concerns, but decisions which keep the golden goose laying the eggs are put off.
Actually I hope the travelling public do boycott the 'budget' airlines. They alone are responsible for this 'backlash' and giving aviation a bad name. Pay and conditions, except for pilots of course, are rubbish.
If the amount of money over the years given to private railway companies for the sake of political dogma, had been given to a single integrated British Rail network, we would have the world's best railway system. Again it is the fault of politicians who did not see the need for a fast train network, unlike France and the rest of Europe.
How ridiculous as well to sell off your prime airports to one organisation for the sake of profit. What a staggering ideologically conceived mistake by the Tories.
One moment you have ex Environment Minister David Miliband slagging off Prince Charles over flying to New York with his entourage to collect an environment award, yet before the ink is dry in the newspapers, Miliband sits in a Club seat with his entourage on a BA 747-400 for an environment conference in Delhi!
The low cost airlines saw an opportunity and now this Labour government is reigning them in. The same will happen in Germany too where the Green lobby is very strong. But at least the Germans are getting on with some sort of replacement via a TGV style high speed rail service between all its major cities. Nothing like this going on in the UK. Just the usual home grown bashing of successful businesses and industry's.
Last edited by Poof in Boots; 2nd Sep 2007 at 20:57.
Join Date: Sep 2000
Location: Danger - Deep Excavation
Posts: 338
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
Spot on BillS
"This is the sort of information we should be putting out to counter the environmental crusaders - those that are actually doing so much long term damage to the environmental cause with their incorrect information and attacks on aviation.
Unfortunately we cannot just expect this to go away - political parties are vying with each other to get the "green" vote. Children are being persuaded that flying will kill their future world.
It is only by educating with the correct science that we can counter this attack. The industry has to realise that it has to fight back."
My highlight.
Well said Sir. Respect.
Who leads the fight?
BALPA?
BAA? (Ahem!)
IATA? They would be my preferred choice.
Unfortunately we cannot just expect this to go away - political parties are vying with each other to get the "green" vote. Children are being persuaded that flying will kill their future world.
It is only by educating with the correct science that we can counter this attack. The industry has to realise that it has to fight back."
My highlight.
Well said Sir. Respect.
Who leads the fight?
BALPA?
BAA? (Ahem!)
IATA? They would be my preferred choice.
Join Date: Dec 2004
Location: london
Posts: 331
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
I would happily use high - speed trains instead of flying london to EDI/GLA. If they existed. Currently they often reach 125 mph, which the japanese shinkansen could achieve in the 1960's. On some stretches, they are suppoed to reach 140 mph. To explain further, here is a comparison of journey times from wikipedia;
"Comparisons with mainline continental services suggest that Virgin and other UK operators have a long way to go in terms of both value for money and speed. Taking a typical mainline route (London to Glasgow). The best that Virgin can achieve is 4.25 hours. By comparison, a similar mainline route (Paris to Valence) takes 2 hours. Oddly, this difference is repeated (in an inverse fashion) in fare prices. An open first class return for the Virgin route is £328 by contrast it is £160 for the French/SNCF route."
Source : http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Virgin_Trains
From a pax perspective, half the people who fly to (the hell that is known as) LHR from Scotland only do so, in order to connect to an international flight. Maybe that is something that could be rectified.
"Comparisons with mainline continental services suggest that Virgin and other UK operators have a long way to go in terms of both value for money and speed. Taking a typical mainline route (London to Glasgow). The best that Virgin can achieve is 4.25 hours. By comparison, a similar mainline route (Paris to Valence) takes 2 hours. Oddly, this difference is repeated (in an inverse fashion) in fare prices. An open first class return for the Virgin route is £328 by contrast it is £160 for the French/SNCF route."
Source : http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Virgin_Trains
From a pax perspective, half the people who fly to (the hell that is known as) LHR from Scotland only do so, in order to connect to an international flight. Maybe that is something that could be rectified.
Join Date: May 2006
Location: Manchester UK
Posts: 69
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
Stop falling for it!
Oh well here we go
Look, these sort of things are always brought up by the unelectable BEFORE they get anywhere near 'power'.
Doesn't anyone remember the fiasco of Neil Kinnock saying that Labour would abolish Nuclear weapons! That bit of PR had the desired effect ie: getting people talking about Neil Kinnock!
Cameron is in the same situation as Kinnock was, although no-one particularly likes/trusts/or even wants the present incumbent there is as yet no credible alternative and the Tories are running around trying to garner support from fringe interests, just as the Labour party did during their 'wilderness' years so Cameron is making himself available to the regular groups of greens, gays, hug a hoodie, anti-war etc etc in a desperate attempt to extricate and entrenched opponent.
However, as always the realities of Government, the pressure exerted by the 'professionals' (Civil service) and 'the enemy' (Europe) means that generally speaking nothing too extreme ever actually happens, also, especially these days, if anyone truly believes that the British Government of any colour can reduce the global expansion of air travel they are asleep at the wheel!
So, for my two pennyworth, as always, dont believe what the papers say, dont believe prospective Governments 'wish lists' and definitely dont believe elected Governments 'plans for the next 10 years'
Ultimately cash is king and while there are paying customers there will be services to satisfy them!
Regards to all
Xraf
Look, these sort of things are always brought up by the unelectable BEFORE they get anywhere near 'power'.
Doesn't anyone remember the fiasco of Neil Kinnock saying that Labour would abolish Nuclear weapons! That bit of PR had the desired effect ie: getting people talking about Neil Kinnock!
Cameron is in the same situation as Kinnock was, although no-one particularly likes/trusts/or even wants the present incumbent there is as yet no credible alternative and the Tories are running around trying to garner support from fringe interests, just as the Labour party did during their 'wilderness' years so Cameron is making himself available to the regular groups of greens, gays, hug a hoodie, anti-war etc etc in a desperate attempt to extricate and entrenched opponent.
However, as always the realities of Government, the pressure exerted by the 'professionals' (Civil service) and 'the enemy' (Europe) means that generally speaking nothing too extreme ever actually happens, also, especially these days, if anyone truly believes that the British Government of any colour can reduce the global expansion of air travel they are asleep at the wheel!
So, for my two pennyworth, as always, dont believe what the papers say, dont believe prospective Governments 'wish lists' and definitely dont believe elected Governments 'plans for the next 10 years'
Ultimately cash is king and while there are paying customers there will be services to satisfy them!
Regards to all
Xraf