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

191–200 of 361 posts

Re: French lawmakers approve a ban on short domestic flights

#191

Post by kazen44 »

yakireev wrote: post #178
pyrale wrote: post #166

Earlier quoted context omitted.

> That's an infrastructure problem too, though! There's no reason rail service directly to and from airports can't be integrated with the system. It's true in many places already, though I know nothing about France. That's an infrastructure feature. Trains are designed to serve city centers, and they do it well. Moving high speed train infrastructure to airports just for the sake of fliers would kill train experience…

> Trains are designed to serve city centers, and they do it well. Moving high speed train infrastructure to airports just for the sake of fliers would kill train experience for everyone else. Would it? If you ever visit Netherlands, take a note on how well Schiphol airport is integrated to the rail network. Its underground railway station, Luchthaven Schiphol, is just yet another station on the Rotterdam - Den Haag -…

I also think you underestimate how close schiphol is to most major cities. it is actually becoming a problem because the airport has little to no room for expansion. also, not all trains going the breda - Rotterdam - the Hague -Amsterdam route stop at schiphol airport.

also, the line is sort of infamous for constant delays on the schiphol part of the track.

Re: French lawmakers approve a ban on short domestic flights

#192

Post by kazen44 »

gsnedders wrote: post #75
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.

> 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…

also, France has been Paris centric since well, forever? the French bureaucracy and political system is very centralised and has been since the French revolution. this directly ties into the idea of the state as an institution in French culture in a lot of subtle ways aswell.

Re: French lawmakers approve a ban on short domestic flights

#193

Post by toinebeg »

jkepler wrote: post #87
gsnedders wrote: post #75

Earlier quoted context omitted.

> 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…

« (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.) » Indeed. Currently by train, Bordeaux to Lyon would either go via Paris, or via Toulouse/Montpellier. Building train lines across the Massif Central doesn't really make economic sense due to the sparse population density.

The lines exists. There is a project of a cooperative rail company who want to exploit this route with the existing infrastructure.

https://www.railcoop.fr/ (in french)

Re: French lawmakers approve a ban on short domestic flights

#194

Post by inter_netuser »

fredophile wrote: post #180
bluefirebrand wrote: post #177

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Incidentally I think Calgary and Edmonton would be an ideal pair of cities to have some kind of high speed rail between. Would be a great alternative to air travel.

I'd agree in terms of distance and traffic between the two cities. However, the long, relatively severe winters would probably add some complications to high speed rail.

Check out the rail to Bergen, in Norway. Shot in 4K.

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=atyvdC15HFA

Re: French lawmakers approve a ban on short domestic flights

#195

Post by kazen44 »

jcranmer wrote: post #102
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.

Knowing the history of railroads, this comment is truly spit-take worthy. Railroads are my go-to example for what the "model" capitalistic industry looks like. Historically, the investment boom/bust cycles were driven in large part by railroad mania--most railroads in the 19th century were funded by public stock offerings to raise the capital to build them, producing and popping investment bubbles with almost decadal…

to give you a bit of history from the European perspective.

most railways in Europe have been build by state programs to kickstart further industrialisation during the later half of the 19th century. prior to rail, the only way to transport bulk goods like coal and iron ore efficiently was through canalways. rails solved the issue of getting the raw goods to the industrial centers where people lived to produce goods efficiently. it also allowed for rapid expansion of cities and town and made cities and town with no access to a waterway far more viable.

privatization of rail only happenend after the cold war, and is mostly seen as a failure in most countries.

Re: French lawmakers approve a ban on short domestic flights

#197

Post by Scoundreller »

inter_netuser wrote: post #194
fredophile wrote: post #180

Earlier quoted context omitted.

I'd agree in terms of distance and traffic between the two cities. However, the long, relatively severe winters would probably add some complications to high speed rail.

Check out the rail to Bergen, in Norway. Shot in 4K. https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=atyvdC15HFA

Not sure if an electric rail-line would be an easy sell in Alberta.

Re: French lawmakers approve a ban on short domestic flights

#198

Post by gsnedders »

toinebeg wrote: post #193
jkepler wrote: post #87

Earlier quoted context omitted.

« (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.) » Indeed. Currently by train, Bordeaux to Lyon would either go via Paris, or via Toulouse/Montpellier. Building train lines across the Massif Central doesn't really make economic sense due to the sparse population density.

The lines exists. There is a project of a cooperative rail company who want to exploit this route with the existing infrastructure. https://www.railcoop.fr/ (in french)

Though note from Wikipedia (https://fr.wikipedia.org/wiki/Ligne_de_Lyon_à_Bordeaux) the projected journey time is 6h47, whereas going via Paris (and crossing by Metro) takes around 5h52, and there are a few connections via Massy TGV taking around 5h31.

That said, I think this exactly shows one of the benefits of liberialisation of the rail market: it allows other companies to serve routes that the nationalised operator does not want to.

Re: French lawmakers approve a ban on short domestic flights

#199

Post by sys_64738 »

robocat wrote: post #163
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/

“each company on this chart deals in fossil fuels”. Their contribution “is mostly from the combustion of their products”. So you want to blame supply, and not demand (airlines in your example). How pointless.

Wait, what?

Re: French lawmakers approve a ban on short domestic flights

#200

Post by bsder »

Sharlin wrote: post #17
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…

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.

> 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.

Mostly ... you don't.

To get that 29 EUR flight you have to book it WAY in advance, generally be on a trip that isn't super popular, and be willing to have no luggage to speak of.

When we were in England, France and Italy pre-Covid, we priced out moving around on the train vs moving around on planes.

The trains almost always won (sometimes by quite a lot) and had the advantage that you could buy the tickets with a day or two of advance rather than planes which required 2 weeks of advance to get a sane price.

Now, obviously, we were moving between big cities and didn't need a car (because "tourist"). Business travel would probably be a different beast.

Post reply on HN