Go Back  PPRuNe Forums > Misc. Forums > Airlines, Airports & Routes
Reload this Page >

France to ban internal short haul?

Airlines, Airports & Routes Topics about airports, routes and airline business.

France to ban internal short haul?

Old 14th Apr 2021, 09:17
  #41 (permalink)  
 
Join Date: Aug 2011
Location: UK
Age: 51
Posts: 0
Except if you read the article connecting flights aren’t affected. Just point to point.
highflyer40 is offline  
Old 14th Apr 2021, 10:42
  #42 (permalink)  
Thread Starter
 
Join Date: Oct 2018
Location: Ferrara
Posts: 4,281
Lets stay on topic if we can...............................

I can't see it having any significant affect on airline sin France TBH
Asturias56 is offline  
Old 14th Apr 2021, 10:53
  #43 (permalink)  
 
Join Date: Feb 2001
Location: The Winchester
Posts: 6,307
Originally Posted by highflyer40 View Post
Except if you read the article connecting flights aren’t affected. Just point to point.
If that's really the plan it's going to interesting to see how/if that will be policed, and TBH in reality I can't see AF running flights (well, not many) between ORY and Nantes, Bordeaux and Lyon solely for connecting passengers.

https://www.linternaute.com/voyage/p...ns-pour-l-ete/
wiggy is offline  
Old 14th Apr 2021, 13:09
  #44 (permalink)  
 
Join Date: Jan 2008
Location: Reading, UK
Posts: 13,806
I think the distinction being made is between O&D flights and those continuing to somewhere else, so for example a theoretical ORY-BOD-MAD flight would be exempt.

If the exemption were for any flight that could be carrying passengers who are connecting at the destination, then that would effectively give carriers carte blanche (or whatever the French equivalent is) to fly pretty well any internal route.
DaveReidUK is offline  
Old 14th Apr 2021, 13:09
  #45 (permalink)  
 
Join Date: Dec 2003
Location: A little South of North
Posts: 275
My bet wiggy is that you may find that a significant percentage (+/- 80%) of the past loads have been connecting pax.
Pistonprop is offline  
Old 14th Apr 2021, 16:47
  #46 (permalink)  
Thread Starter
 
Join Date: Oct 2018
Location: Ferrara
Posts: 4,281
I've been looking for the actual text to see how they define "connecting flights" but no luck so far
Asturias56 is offline  
Old 14th Apr 2021, 17:01
  #47 (permalink)  
Thread Starter
 
Join Date: Oct 2018
Location: Ferrara
Posts: 4,281
Article 36 : Interdiction des vols réguliers en cas d’alternative en train d’une durée de moins de deux heures trente

Fixation, par décret en Conseil d’État des niveaux d’émission de CO2 par passager et par kilomètre transporté permettant de considérer qu’un vol est décarboné [3147 de M. Zulesi (LaREM) rapporteur].
Rapport du Gouvernement au Parlement sur la possibilité d’étendre le dispositif d’interdiction aux services aériens de fret entre Paris–Charles-de-Gaulle et les métropoles situées à moins de 2 h 30 en train [identiques 4316 de M. Fugit (LaREM) sous amendé par le 5384 et 5383 de M. Zulesi (LaREM) rapporteur, et 4712 de M. Pupponi (Dem)

Article 36: Prohibition of regular flights in the event of an alternative train lasting less than two and a half hours Fixing, by decree of the Council of State, of CO2 emission levels per passenger and per kilometer transported, allowing a flight to be considered carbon-free [3147 by Mr. Zulesi (LaREM) rapporteur]. Report from the Government to Parliament on the possibility of extending the prohibition system to air freight services between Paris – Charles-de-Gaulle and the metropolises located less than 2 hours 30 minutes by train [identical 4316 to M. Fugit (LaREM ) as amended by 5384 and 5383 from Mr. Zulesi (LaREM) rapporteur, and 4712 from Mr. Pupponi (Dem)].

I've looked at some of the Amendments and they seem to envisage adding passengers to the restrictions - can't see any definition of "connecting flights"
Asturias56 is offline  
Old 14th Apr 2021, 17:04
  #48 (permalink)  
Thread Starter
 
Join Date: Oct 2018
Location: Ferrara
Posts: 4,281
It looks like the actual definitions will be up to the Council of State -"when the air services mainly provide the transport of connecting passengers" is the critical wording I think


Article 36 I. - Article L. 6412-3 of the Transport Code is amended as follows: 1 ° At the beginning, the words: "I. -" are added; 2 ° A II worded as follows is added: “II. - Are prohibited, on the basis of Article 20 of Regulation (EC) No 1008/2008 of the European Parliament and of the Council of 24 September 2008 cited above, the regular public air transport services of passengers concerning all air links to the 'Inside French territory, the journey is also provided on the national rail network without a connection and by several daily connections of less than two and a half hours. "A decree in Council of State specifies the conditions of application of the first paragraph of this II, in particular the characteristics of the railway links concerned, which must ensure a sufficient service, and the methods according to which it can be derogated from this prohibition when the air services mainly provide the transport of connecting passengers or can be regarded as providing low-carbon air transport. It specifies the levels of carbon dioxide emissions per passenger carried per kilometer that aircraft must reach to be considered carbon-free. "The application of this ban gives rise to an assessment after a period of three years from its entry into force. " I a (new). - Within one year of the promulgation of this law, the Government presents to Parliament a report on the possibility of extending the system mentioned in I to freight flights between Paris-Charles de Gaulle airport and metropolitan areas located less than two and a half hours by train, in order to provide rail courier services as an alternative to air and road transport. II. - This article comes into force on the last Sunday in March of the year following that of the promulgation of the law.
Asturias56 is offline  
Old 14th Apr 2021, 23:51
  #49 (permalink)  
 
Join Date: Feb 2002
Location: Hongkers
Posts: 469
Originally Posted by Asturias56 View Post
Lets stay on topic if we can...............................

I can't see it having any significant affect on airline sin France TBH
If that is true, then how does this achieve the objective?
bekolblockage is offline  
Old 15th Apr 2021, 00:24
  #50 (permalink)  
 
Join Date: Dec 2015
Location: France
Posts: 507
Asturias56

Actually it's not mistranslated.
It's just that politicians themselves (at least here) don't understand airline economics.
So they made an amalgam between connecting flights and flights to CDG (which is the main hub, as you know), and local/domestic flights and flights to ORY (which is the secondary hub, with many connecting flights to french overseas territories)

So you can still book a ticket from Bordeaux to Paris provided you choose CDG. You can book a ticket from Bordeaux to La Réunion but if your long haul flights departs from Orly you will have to take a train to a city called Massy, 15 minutes away from Orly by cab, and make a self connection with a taxi or something.. I don't know if they're planning anything serious.

Only three destinations are concerned for Air France : Orly to Bordeaux, Lyon, and Nantes. Maybe there are some HOP lines affected as well, but Air France working hand in hand with the government I think will not mourn them, as they want to replace HOP with transavia, which is a true low cost; HOP is the regional subsidiary, it was made by joining 3 previous regional airlines, but instead of merging them, they added a fourth entity to manage the three previous ones. So they just piled up the costs.

Aviation faces many challenge as of now in France.
Some environmentalists and the left party (a bit more left than left but not so extreme) want to increase the limit to up to 4 hours or 4.5 hours by train. They say this would include Paris to Nice, but the shortest train travel is 5h50min so this proves that they really don't know what they're talking about. But it would include Toulouse and Marseille which are two huge domestic lines, as well as montpellier, maybe Brest
The mayor of a small city started a nationwide controversy after saying that children should forget their aviation dreams.
The mayor of another small city refused its airshow to continue.
They closed an airstrip (before covid) in the mountains that was very useful and had much mountain flying activity. They also want to limit mountain flying around the Mont Blanc due to noise pollution..
The mayor of Lyon refused the national aerobatics squadron to continue flying over their city for airshows.
Aerial advertising which had some presence over our beaches was made illegal.

... Who knows what's next ?
It's a bit worrying.
Originally Posted by OldLurker View Post
Surely the guide should be comparative travel times for real journeys.
For example, Paris to Nice. How long does it take, on average (not fastest achievable by racing) to get from Notre-Dame to Place Masséna by public transport (1) by TGV, (2) by air, including travel time to station/airport, check-in, security, sitting around waiting to board, boarding, gate-to-gate time of train or plane, getting out of station/airport, travel time to destination? I don't know, but I'd bet on the TGV winning.
This is not a good metric. There are 12 million people in Paris. Of which only 2 million, about 16%, live inside Paris center. Sort of the same situation in most cities (except Nice due to peculiar geography between sea and mountain)
For Nice it certainly does not make the TGV win, 5h40 to 6 hours vs 1h20 by plane, even if you add very generous times for boarding. You may add 3 hours to the airplane time and 1 hour to the train time, so this would make about 7h vs 4h20.
There is however a match for destinations like Marseille, 4 hours by TGV, 4 hours by plane. If you're a frequent flyer used to arriving late at the airport, and/or if you live closer to an airport than a station, plane wins, if you're closer to the station and/or are not used to flying, TGV wins.

In practise, the TGV wins over the airplane when the train time becomes lower than 2h30 approximately. Except at Bordeaux because there were a lot of companies with sites just close to Mérignac airport and just close to Orly airport. So for them BOD-ORY was perfect.
AF can compete with the TGV when there is at least 2h30 of train time, easyjet can do so when there is at least 4.5 hours of train time.
KayPam is offline  
Old 15th Apr 2021, 00:30
  #51 (permalink)  
 
Join Date: Dec 2015
Location: France
Posts: 507
Originally Posted by eagle21 View Post
BOD airport would be the most affected, but in reality BA, LH, KLM, IB, will increase their flights there and create the extra connecting capacity. If anything this measure will create jobs outside France.
Other problems :
Orly is an airport limited by its slots.
Cancel a flight with the shorter flight time, that frees up a spot.
Free up a spot, another flight can take place. Since the cancelled flight was the shortest, and short flights are forbidden, mandatorily a longer flight will take place.
Now Orly instead of having a short flight has a long flight.
A long flight pollutes more than a short flight.

Suppose there was a CDG to XXX flight with some airlines, and some low cost airlines wanted to get into this market, but couldn't because there was too much competition.
Now a low cost airline can start a flight from XXX to ORY, with a competitive advantage that allows them to take this risk.
The lines to CDG are well established and they may lose some revenue per seat but they will continue to operate.
You have extended the market from Paris to XXX.

This measure is totally counterproductive.

So, either our politicians are stupid, either they are serving someone else's agendas. Be it to satisfy the green party or any other thing...

Originally Posted by IBE8720 View Post
If that is so, then why let market forces dictate the travel requirememt?
Is it going to effect private aircraft as well? Are the rich and famous going to have walk into Gard de Nord and sit next me on the train?

FYI, the electricity that is required to run the trains, is NOT generated by trees, or thin air. It comes from a power plant that emits CO2! .
Of course not, the rich and famous have a private jet from Le Bourget or Toussus. Are you crazy, haha ?

In France powerplants are still mainly nuclear, so they pollute a bit less, and criticizing the train's emissions is harder. You need to take into account more advanced concepts like marginal consumption or infrastructure construction emissions.
But France is closing nuclear capacity to replace it with renewable and fossil, so it's still stupid !
Originally Posted by LGS6753 View Post
If Air France are clever (I did say if), surely they would put on connecting flights via AMS. and their KLM partners rather than PAR.
Actually the union saw that coming and put in place an agreement that requires AF to keep a percentage of activity at AF and not KLM. But they struggle to uphold it.
KayPam is offline  
Old 15th Apr 2021, 06:56
  #52 (permalink)  
Thread Starter
 
Join Date: Oct 2018
Location: Ferrara
Posts: 4,281
Thanks KAYPAM for an in-country perspective

Of course the TGV wins over air even when it takes lightly longer- no security , no early check-in, no wait for bags - and the seating is better and you can move around. I'd always use the TGV Paris - Marseilles but agree that to Nice or the south-central the plane wins
Asturias56 is offline  
Old 15th Apr 2021, 08:13
  #53 (permalink)  
 
Join Date: Apr 2004
Location: Up The 116E, Stbd Turn at 32S...:-)
Age: 80
Posts: 3,030
I much prefer the train anyway.
NO 'Security' bag search (normally - when I have travelled in France anyway), get out of your seat and go for a walk when you want to, have a beer or two in the bar, or numerous coffees if that's your style, enjoy the scenery - you can actually see it thru the BIG window....AND.....
Depart and Arrive - in the MIDDLE of town..!

What's the fuss..?
Ex FSO GRIFFO is offline  
Old 16th Apr 2021, 07:57
  #54 (permalink)  
 
Join Date: Apr 2021
Location: Sydney
Posts: 0
Wouldn’t biofuels solve this ?
Plus a carbon tax to make them competitive?
Otherwise aviation has no future.
TukwillaFlyboy is offline  
Old 16th Apr 2021, 15:18
  #55 (permalink)  
Thread Starter
 
Join Date: Oct 2018
Location: Ferrara
Posts: 4,281
I think they'll offer a dispensation for electric powered aircraft.. Nice niche market - 2.5 hours all over land sounds just about right
Asturias56 is offline  
Old 17th Apr 2021, 15:47
  #56 (permalink)  
 
Join Date: Feb 2008
Location: Ohio
Posts: 114
Good thing that the Mercure is long since retired, LOL!
fdcg27 is offline  

Posting Rules
You may not post new threads
You may not post replies
You may not post attachments
You may not edit your posts

BB code is On
Smilies are On
[IMG] code is On
HTML code is Off
Trackbacks are Off
Pingbacks are Off
Refbacks are Off


Thread Tools
Search this Thread

Contact Us - Archive - Advertising - Cookie Policy - Privacy Statement - Terms of Service - Do Not Sell My Personal Information -

Copyright © 2021 MH Sub I, LLC dba Internet Brands. All rights reserved. Use of this site indicates your consent to the Terms of Use.