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

71–80 of 361 posts

Re: French lawmakers approve a ban on short domestic flights

#71

Post by Sharlin »

EdwinLarkin wrote: post #36
Sharlin wrote: post #27

Earlier quoted context omitted.

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.

What does it even mean to account for externalities? The relative time on the airport is not high.You can literally come to the airport just a few minutes before your departure (and many people in fact do this). Also most airports are in my opinion much better organized than train stations.

Well, the most topical externality right now is CO2 emissions, of course. Airlines don't have to pay for their emission rights – indeed, jet fuel is artificially cheap because it's VAT free because of reasons.

Re: French lawmakers approve a ban on short domestic flights

#72

Post by jcranmer »

dmurray wrote: post #48
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…

"Planes take longer to travel city centre to city centre" always gets trotted out in these discussions, but it's the wrong comparison. People don't all live in the city centre. Airports are usually outside the city, but well served by motorways and public transport. I wouldn't be surprised if more people can reach Charles de Gaulle or Orly within 45 minutes at rush hour than can get to Gare de Lyon.

The US cities with the best transit have poor transit by world measures. Sure, most people don't live in the city centers, they live in the suburbs. But for much of Europe, suburbia means easy access to high frequency regional rail transit systems that gives you easy 45-60 minute access to city center at all times of the day. Even in the US, where I've lived in cities that had what the US thinks is good transit, getting to an intercity rail station has often been as easy, if not easier, than getting to the airport, even though I'm originating in the suburbs.

Re: French lawmakers approve a ban on short domestic flights

#73

Post by Sharlin »

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…

Yes, the sort of "triumph" that got us into this catastrophically unsustainable situation. Flights are not cheap. It's just that the hidden costs are paid by all of us, including yet unborn humans. This cannot continue.

Re: French lawmakers approve a ban on short domestic flights

#74

Post by Retric »

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…

Work out the fuel costs per passenger mile and that’s a subsidized ticket. Now, airlines often have a surplus of seats on a route and will sell some of them at a nominal loss over flying empty seats, but they couldn’t operate the route if everyone was paying that.

Re: French lawmakers approve a ban on short domestic flights

#75

Post by gsnedders »

Scoundreller wrote: post #18
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…

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.

> One issue with France is that their train system is very Paris-centric.

I mean it's not just the rail network; it's _all_ of France. Some of that is unsurprising given a 1/5th of the population live in Paris and the surrounding area. A significant amount of business travel from outside of Paris resultantly ends up being to Paris.

There's definitely an argument that investing in infrastructure that isn't centred on Paris may help change how Paris-centric the country generally is, but that's a much harder sell politically.

(And something like Bordeaux to Lyon needs to cross the Massif Central, which will significantly increase the cost of construction, which potentially makes it even less likely to happen.)

Re: French lawmakers approve a ban on short domestic flights

#76

Post by keiferski »

ur-whale wrote: post #63
keiferski wrote: post #50

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Most major airports in France have train connections built-in.

LOL, you clearly haven't had to travel CDG center of Paris by train very often. What you say is true (there is a train), but the quality of service is so bad (strikes, trains late or overcrowded, broken ticket machines, broken escalators, PITA to go from gate to train terminal) that most people who can afford it would rather be stuck in freeway jams in a taxi than consider taking the train.

I was replying to the above comment's reference to connections. It is fairly easy to fly into Paris and take a train to Lyon, for example, without having to go into Paris proper first.

Re: French lawmakers approve a ban on short domestic flights

#77

Post by EdwinLarkin »

Symbiote wrote: post #67
EdwinLarkin wrote: post #39

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Railway systems usually dont play well with capitalism as there is very little competition (given that infrastructure and the train operator is usually a state owned company). Aviation is simply much more efficient.

> Aviation is simply much more efficient. Efficient, how? It uses much more energy, makes more noise and creates more pollution. The speed has very little to do with the funding model. Flights were still faster in the 1970s when many state-owned airlines operated, and trains are little different when private companies run them (see: several European countries).

Point-to-point travel is much faster and more efficient with planes than with trains.

Re: French lawmakers approve a ban on short domestic flights

#78

Post by xalava »

ajross wrote: post #42
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…

> There is no reason to fly short distance if you want to go from city center to city center. In France. In nations like the US (outside the DC-to-Boston corridor anyway) without a well-designed and -maintained rail infastructure, 1-2 hour flights are routine and not really replaceable with other options. Infrastructure investment pays off for decades and decades, and Europe has done really well here. > However, if y…

The US is pretty exceptional in its lack of rails. There is also a Seattle-San Diego. Enjoyable as a tourist, but probably not suited for business purposes except in the last portions.

In France some high speed trains go now directly to airports (CDG,LYO). So it is becoming possible to chain a plane and a train in a few scenarios.

Re: French lawmakers approve a ban on short domestic flights

#79

Post by haakonhr »

ur-whale wrote: post #66
haakonhr wrote: post #14

Let's ban stuff instead of ensuring fair competition and better pricing of externalities.. Of interest: https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Kerosene_tax#Criticism_of_the_...

Not sure which way you lean here. Are you saying you are on the side of banning stuff, or do you think it's a bad idea?

The ban is kind of the equivalent of a quick, hacky fix of some bug. It is better than nothing, but in general I'm against banning stuff as the problem is that the flights are too cheap, partially due to reasons like tax exemption on fuel.

Re: French lawmakers approve a ban on short domestic flights

#80

Post by gsnedders »

sys_64738 wrote: post #54

What's the point of trimming the edges when the real culprits get off lightly? No airlines in this league table of culprits. https://www.visualcapitalist.com/companies-carbon-emissions/

How many of those companies got government-backed loans from the French government in 2020?
Post reply on HN