"Why are flights in the UK so often cheaper than taking the train?"
Some of the reasons are nonsensical:
for trains:
"The fuel is subject to VAT at 5% on diesel and 20% on electricity.".
this should be the reverse?!?
for planes:
"Fuel accounts for a much bigger part of airlines’ costs, but they do not have to pay VAT or duty on it.".
#SaveThePlanet and tax planes in proportion of the damage they do to their environment!
@elduvelle @albertcardona Moreoever, why is it that there are direct flights between cities in the UK that I need eight changes on the train and a dozen little bus trips for?
With each change likely to fail at a rate of 10% that gives me a less than 50% change of reaching my destination…
Airplane it is.
This summer I have to go from Barcelona to Berlin. The non-flight options are ... insane. I wouldn't mind a 24-hour trip by train, but it's not even that*. Many legs, no coordination between providers, subways and buses included. I am not a XIX century naturalist crossing uncharted territory, I am crossing the European Union from South to somewhat North. It's embarrassing.
* I was hoping for a 2-leg train, i.e., Barcelona-Paris and Paris-Berlin in the same day, but no, that would require me sleeping in Paris! The lack of coordination is as astonishing as it is appalling.
@jonmsterling @albertcardona @elduvelle I kind of enjoy the vibe of public transit where it's like these are migrating beasts and by careful divination and ritual offering you can harness their primal energy to speed you in a particular direction, like a raptor riding thermals. Of course there isn't going to be a migration going precisely from A to B, but with a bit of cleverness you can stitch together something.
It's pretty magical and unprecedented in human history that I can cross so many different countries by land safely and relatively quickly. Sure, OK, it could be faster. But like, thank you migrating beasts you are wonderful creatures.
@tml @olynch @albertcardona @elduvelle I think it's pretty easy to tell by the fact that it is not a major plot point in books and movies of the 20th century that it is impossible to get from one point to another without several missed trains, replacement busses that don't show up, etc. In those days, people made plans that required them to arrive at a certain time, and those plans generally worked.
The 20th Century would have been impossible without functional rail transit. Today, plans that involve travelling by train must necessarily involve arriving a day early and paying for a hotel if you need to guarantee an on-time arrival.
@tml @olynch @albertcardona @elduvelle I mean, the balkans is one thing.
But it is impossible to get from Cambridge to Oxford for a daytime meeting without staying overnight.
If I wanted to go to Glasgow, I would have to use four different train companies and none of the different train companies coordinate with each other — meaning that what ought to be a simple fix (as in the case of missed flights, where it just gets fixed without your intervention) becomes a huge ordeal that you are fully responsible for.
@jonmsterling @tml @olynch @albertcardona
You can do Cambridge (if that's where you're starting from) to Glasgow with 1 change (see trainline screenshot).
for the rest I agree: the coordination between multiple UK train companies is a pain, the trains are generally slow, somewhat unreliable (at least it's easy to get reimbursed if they are late) and they are expensive. Lots to be improved!
@jonmsterling @olynch @albertcardona @elduvelle "The Balkans is one thing" sounds like "No True Scotsman".
- No Scotsman puts sugar on his porridge.
- But my uncle Angus is a Scotsman and he puts sugar on his porridge
- But no *true* Scotsman puts sugar on his porridge
- There was no major book or film in the 1900s where delayed trains are important
- Heard of Murder on the Orient Express?
- Yes but that doesn't count because it was the Balkans
The OP made a valid point, amounting to: it's not infrastructure if one can't rely on it, if one can't use it without making alternative plans. Nothing more and nothing less. The flying experience is atrocious for many reasons but being late by a day is a rare event (particularly when normalized by volume of passengers), and incurring in outrageous accidental expenses is also rare, not so with rail.
Rail used to work better and offer more services; flying became reliable and easy by riding on government subsidies. All we are saying is, let's revert that: flying should be expensive, even forbidden by law for short range when a train is clearly advantageous, where "short range" is pretty large considering high-speed trains, like the whole length of France.
@jonmsterling @tml @albertcardona @elduvelle I'm all for improving the train system, but I worry that this is unnecessary FUD (fear, uncertainty, doubt) w.r.t. people making transit decisions. I've traveled between Southern England and Scotland probably four or five times now (and other long distances in the UK) and sometimes it takes longer than advertised, but the magic of a train ticket being "any permitted route" means that Google maps can just route me around missed trains. And Oxford<->Cambridge is annoying but certainly doable for a day trip with an early morning start.
Perhaps I'm less optimized for reliably getting places on time than you, but I think there's a strong case to be made for not refusing to use infrastructure until it's perfect.
@olynch @tml @albertcardona @elduvelle I don't have many trips where it is not extremely important that I arrive on time.
I'd take the comment about FUD seriously if it came with a commitment to personally pay for my hotel, taxi, etc. when I end up eating shit.
@jonmsterling When I’m in the UK I have often done (suburban) Glasgow to Nottingham as a day trip for work. It’s long, but not particularly stressful, I get several hours at the destination, and when things go wrong you are well looked after.
Cambridge to Oxford is straightforward, too.
El Duvelle
Jon Sterling
Albert Cardona
Owen Lynch
Tor Lillqvist
kevin
David Weir
Rob Larter
Martin Hoffmann