Hacker News Board Hacker News, browsed like a classic message board
Live data from Hacker News

French lawmakers approve a ban on short domestic flights

reuters.com

Post reply on HN
Print view View original

51–60 of 361 posts

Re: French lawmakers approve a ban on short domestic flights

#51

Post by jankassens »

Denvercoder9 wrote: post #32
Scoundreller wrote: post #18

Earlier quoted context omitted.

I largely agree. One issue with France is that their train system is very Paris-centric. Want to go from the Rennes northwest to the Toulouse in the southwest? Yeah, you’re going to go through Paris in the centre of the country. Same with Bordeaux to Lyon. Takes about the same time driving as high-speed rail takes a horseshoe route.

This is kind of an intrinsic problem with transport that needs infrastructure along the whole route (i.e. trains and cars). You need a minimum amount of travel along a route for it to be worth it to construct and maintain that infrastructure. The system naturally evolves to a hub-and-spoke model. Planes just need infrastructure at both ends, so it's a lot easier to create a point-to-point model.

You’ll end up main connections and smaller ones to reach smaller destinations. This doesn’t mean it needs a single center like Paris. Compare the map to Germany where there are roughly 3 parallel fast North-South lines not focused on a single center.

https://en.m.wikipedia.org/wiki/High-speed_rail_in_Europe#/m...

Re: French lawmakers approve a ban on short domestic flights

#52

Post by EdwinLarkin »

Essentially all this is is a tax on quality of life. Quality of life will decrease for rich nations for nothing as all the environmental gains will be offset by emerging economies.

China will continue to build more and its population will also continue to consume more.

Re: French lawmakers approve a ban on short domestic flights

#53

Post by [deleted] »

Denvercoder9 wrote: post #32
Scoundreller wrote: post #18

Earlier quoted context omitted.

I largely agree. One issue with France is that their train system is very Paris-centric. Want to go from the Rennes northwest to the Toulouse in the southwest? Yeah, you’re going to go through Paris in the centre of the country. Same with Bordeaux to Lyon. Takes about the same time driving as high-speed rail takes a horseshoe route.

This is kind of an intrinsic problem with transport that needs infrastructure along the whole route (i.e. trains and cars). You need a minimum amount of travel along a route for it to be worth it to construct and maintain that infrastructure. The system naturally evolves to a hub-and-spoke model. Planes just need infrastructure at both ends, so it's a lot easier to create a point-to-point model.

[deleted]

Re: French lawmakers approve a ban on short domestic flights

#55

Post by ur-whale »

medium_burrito wrote: post #7
bpodgursky wrote: post #2

Maybe they should ask themselves _why_ someone would take a flight instead of a 2.5 hour train ride? There's really no reason a human would try to fly instead of take a train, if the trains were functioning at high efficiency. Flying sucks. And yet...

Because light rail/bus to airport is cheap, and $25 fares are cheap. And the trains are expensive. Now, why is flying so cheap vs a train? The whole the US government essentially gives away 737s at a loss to employ people might be one part of it? Nobody is giving away free trains that I know of.

> why is flying so cheap vs a train?

In France, the answer is simple: the train company is basically a monopoly (owned via a very thin veil by the state).

They are therefore, like all entities not subjected to competition:

    - expensive
    - unreliable
    - low quality of service overall (atrocious food, disgustingly dirty bathrooms, in-seat power supply almost never works, internet non-nexistant).

Re: French lawmakers approve a ban on short domestic flights

#56

Post by verall »

kevindong wrote: post #41
Sharlin wrote: post #17

Earlier quoted context omitted.

And flights costing 29 EUR are simply a market (and policy) failure. In no reasonable sustainably operating economy would we ever have gotten into a situation of flights being cheaper than train trips.

Counterexample: in Summer 2019, I took a one way flight from Rome to Lisbon via Ryanair for $57.40 USD / ~€48.77 (current conversion rates, my receipt was denominated in USD). That's a 1,160 miles / 1,870 km / ~2.75 hour flight (distance is as the crow flies). A train cannot compete with that. Not that a reasonable train itinerary between Lisbon and Rome exists. For May 2021 [0], I'm seeing several roundtrip itinerar…

It would be more of a triumph if those $30 flights were not using leaded fuel, or if there was at least some lead pollution task to encourage people to take different transit options until the airline industry figures it out.

I think, it was much less of a problem, when many less planes were flying.

-- Correction in the comment, Jet-A has no lead. Cursory research suggests its nasty products are mostly organics rather than heavy metals, which is much less bad. Thanks!

https://pubmed.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/15093276/

Re: French lawmakers approve a ban on short domestic flights

#57

Post by roamerz »

I wonder if this was actually the best way to accomplish this. From some of the other comments it seems like the reason the flights are less expensive is because of airline subsidies. Maybe the lawmakers didn’t have the powers to affect the subsidies but had the power to enact a law? I also wonder if this will have the side effect of clogging the trains routes with too many people. It’s been my experience that when lawmakers bend to environmentalists and special interests it always negatively affects the common folk who’s focus is providing for their families or simply surviving and don’t wield the necessary political influence to make their voices heard.

Re: French lawmakers approve a ban on short domestic flights

#58

Post by ipqk »

tgsovlerkhgsel wrote: post #4

There is no reason to fly short distance if you want to go from city center to city center. However, if you're already arriving or leaving on a long distance flight, the whole overhead of getting to/from/through the airport disappears and those 1.5 hours start making a difference. I think forcing companies to advertise more honest flight durations and prices could make a huge difference. If the airline tells you that…

Just put a large tax if the short, domestic flight isn't a connecting flight.

Short, domestic flight by itself: 100€

Short, domestic flight part of an international itinerary: +30€

It'll mostly work itself out.

Re: French lawmakers approve a ban on short domestic flights

#59

Post by Denvercoder9 »

jankassens wrote: post #51
Denvercoder9 wrote: post #32

Earlier quoted context omitted.

This is kind of an intrinsic problem with transport that needs infrastructure along the whole route (i.e. trains and cars). You need a minimum amount of travel along a route for it to be worth it to construct and maintain that infrastructure. The system naturally evolves to a hub-and-spoke model. Planes just need infrastructure at both ends, so it's a lot easier to create a point-to-point model.

You’ll end up main connections and smaller ones to reach smaller destinations. This doesn’t mean it needs a single center like Paris. Compare the map to Germany where there are roughly 3 parallel fast North-South lines not focused on a single center. https://en.m.wikipedia.org/wiki/High-speed_rail_in_Europe#/m...

Population in France is much more concentrated around Paris than population in Germany is. The Paris metro area accounts for 20% of France's population, while you need the biggest three metro areas in Germany to get to that percentage. Also Germany has double the population density, so even the less dense parts have more people.

Re: French lawmakers approve a ban on short domestic flights

#60

Post by SilasX »

Sharlin wrote: post #27
EdwinLarkin wrote: post #20

Earlier quoted context omitted.

No it does not.if it is faster to fly most people will choose to fly.

Not if the speed comes with a price tag that properly accounts for externalities. Cheap flights are a market failure, plain and simple. Besides, on short flights the relative overhead of getting to/from the airport, and spending time on the airport waiting, is especially high, whereas with trains the overhead is minimal.

Then the solution would be to price the externality, not to ban things one by one.
Post reply on HN