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

France bans short haul domestic flights in favour of train travel

euronews.com

Post reply on HN
Print view View original

71–80 of 149 posts

Re: France bans short haul domestic flights in favour of train travel

#71

Post by retinaros »

retinaros wrote: post #60
mojuba wrote: post #16

I understand the criticism but to be fair high speed trains are better in many cases: Paris - Lyon by airplane: 1h15 plus travel to and from airport, plus security, boarding etc Paris - Lyon by train: 2h30, city center to city center, no security checks. This might actually be faster! Personally when traveling between London and Paris I choose the high speed train. It's usually more expensive but just the fact it rem…

yeah only when its not on strike and then if it is that leaves you with no alternative. it also create a monopoly. train tickets will rise.

why am i downvoted for stating a fact? this year there were 43 days of strike. https://fr.m.wikipedia.org/wiki/Liste_des_gr%C3%A8ves_%C3%A0...

Re: France bans short haul domestic flights in favour of train travel

#72

Post by my123 »

tyingq wrote: post #56
alistairSH wrote: post #24

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Why is train so much more expensive? Surely jets that cost $100s of millions, supported by massive airports, are more expensive? Seems like the market distortions are subsidies to airlines of some sort.

Do trains in France use the same sort of demand-driven pricing scheme airlines use? People tend to estimate airline pricing based on the cheapest price they see, which is often a fraction of the cost when demand changes.

> Do trains in France use the same sort of demand-driven pricing scheme airlines use?

For the high-speed trains, yes.

Re: France bans short haul domestic flights in favour of train travel

#73

Post by rayiner »

quadcore wrote: post #47
dorfsmay wrote: post #42

Earlier quoted context omitted.

What about trips that don't involve Paris, say Nantes - Marseille?

Just insert Paris in between. Nantes - Paris - Marseille shouldnt be too bad really.

Sounds very French.

Re: France bans short haul domestic flights in favour of train travel

#74

Post by rayiner »

retinaros wrote: post #71
retinaros wrote: post #60

Earlier quoted context omitted.

yeah only when its not on strike and then if it is that leaves you with no alternative. it also create a monopoly. train tickets will rise.

why am i downvoted for stating a fact? this year there were 43 days of strike. https://fr.m.wikipedia.org/wiki/Liste_des_gr%C3%A8ves_%C3%A0...

Because train-loving Americans love the idea of France and you're harshing their mellow.

Re: France bans short haul domestic flights in favour of train travel

#75

Post by cauch »

joking wrote: post #68
mojuba wrote: post #16

I understand the criticism but to be fair high speed trains are better in many cases: Paris - Lyon by airplane: 1h15 plus travel to and from airport, plus security, boarding etc Paris - Lyon by train: 2h30, city center to city center, no security checks. This might actually be faster! Personally when traveling between London and Paris I choose the high speed train. It's usually more expensive but just the fact it rem…

That’s correct if everyone traveled from city center to city center, but in my case, the airport is easier to get than the hsr station, has more long time parking options, and sometimes the destination is a layover, so I would have to go from the center of paris to the airport equally. I Would love to travel a lot more by train, or less by plane, but right now and at least in my case, it’s not a very good option.

Laws should not be decided just based on what is good for you in particular, but in considering what is the most efficient in average.

Sure, you may have an easy access to the airport outside the city centre, but people in the city centre, which constitute a bigger number, have a worst access. And people who are not in the city centre but on the other side also have a worst access to the airport than the city centre.

The comment you answer to is still very relevant: it is true that in average using the train is not as disastrous as one could think (so the disadvantages are compensated by the advantage with regard to environment). The fact that it is not advantageous for every one is trivial and not really relevant.

Re: France bans short haul domestic flights in favour of train travel

#76

Post by throw0101c »

the_why_of_y wrote: post #30
alistairSH wrote: post #24

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Why is train so much more expensive? Surely jets that cost $100s of millions, supported by massive airports, are more expensive? Seems like the market distortions are subsidies to airlines of some sort.

Jet fuel is tax free in the EU, a huge market-distorting subsidy: https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Kerosene_tax However, as of 2018, commercial kerosene consumption is currently tax exempt under the legislation of all member states of the European Union.

> Jet fuel is tax free in the EU, a huge market-distorting subsidy:

Also, are the externalities of jet exhaust taken into account? Is there any kind of carbon pricing in EU/France?

Re: France bans short haul domestic flights in favour of train travel

#77

Post by osigurdson »

cauch wrote: post #75
joking wrote: post #68

Earlier quoted context omitted.

That’s correct if everyone traveled from city center to city center, but in my case, the airport is easier to get than the hsr station, has more long time parking options, and sometimes the destination is a layover, so I would have to go from the center of paris to the airport equally. I Would love to travel a lot more by train, or less by plane, but right now and at least in my case, it’s not a very good option.

Laws should not be decided just based on what is good for you in particular, but in considering what is the most efficient in average. Sure, you may have an easy access to the airport outside the city centre, but people in the city centre, which constitute a bigger number, have a worst access. And people who are not in the city centre but on the other side also have a worst access to the airport than the city centre.…

Presumably if trains truly were better, there should be no need for a law. Perhaps they should focus their efforts on making trains an obviously superior service.

Re: France bans short haul domestic flights in favour of train travel

#78

Post by exabrial »

Read between the lines: this has nothing to do with ecology. I don’t really understand the French government and culture enough to guess what the ulterior motive is; perhaps something with keeping non-French companies from running cheap airlines in the country?

Re: France bans short haul domestic flights in favour of train travel

#79

Post by OJFord »

ulfw wrote: post #64
throw_m239339 wrote: post #20

Earlier quoted context omitted.

It costs me around 60€ to go from France to Switzerland by plane. It costs me way more than 60€ to go from France to Switzerland by train. This why people are taking the plane, because it's less expensive that high speed rail, nothing more. Make high speed rail less expensive and people will take the train. Government induced free market distortion under pretense of ecology concerns is just what it is, bullshit, and…

What does France to Switzerland even mean? They border each other. You could walk.

I would think it obviously means between significant cities (ones with airports, at least, clearly) in each... Paris to Zurich or whatever.

Re: France bans short haul domestic flights in favour of train travel

#80

Post by helmholtz »

bsaul wrote: post #38
helmholtz wrote: post #11

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Your comment is high on inflamatory polemics but lacking in substance. If you'd listed _what_ side effects you do foresee, that would have been a much more interesting comment.

We've had numerous examples now of how pseudo-environmental policies destroyed economies and energy infrastructure in europe (germany becoming super dependant on gaz and coal, and france leaving its nuclear infrastructure to rust), with absolutely 0 effect on climate, (and 0 is a generous number, if anything those policies did worst for climate change than just doing nothin). I believe it is now time for citizen to a…

My man, you still haven't told me what this regulation is going to affect. What are the side effects? I'm not talking about energy infrastructure in Europe, nor am I interested in a wider discussion about 'eco-bullshit' or 'pseudo-environmental policies'. I'd just like to see your take on the unintended consequences of this policy that you are able to foresee. Furthermore, if the airplane traffic is indeed this negligible, then why does it even bother you in the first place?

I'm a bit sensitive myself, and apologies if I sound harsh, but HN has a permanent anti-regulation erection and seems to attract know-nothings who love to argue that all regulation is bullshit and the free market will fix everything, every time an article on a government intervention or policy is posted. It drives me bananas.

Post reply on HN