Train vs. plane fares

aus.rail · Posted: Sun Jan 12, 2003 9:48 pm

In aus.rail, on 12 Jan 2003, Richard Mallinson announced:

> Air travel is cheaper or only slightly more expensive,
> quicker and more convenient, so nobody but tourists and mad
> train buffs travels by train. I caught the XPT to Sydney a
> few years ago and 95% of passengers were old age
> pensioners.

I've caught the XPT to Sydney a couple of times and I really
wouldn't want to travel for much longer on a train. It is also
annoying that you can't go straight from Mel-Bris with even a
short changeover in Sydney - you have to wait about 8 hours -
while that does break the trip up, not everyone wants to do
that.

What would be nice would be a high speed train which was
significantly cheaper than flying so there was an actual choice
for commuters to make.

One other thing I noticed which I did really like, was the
airtrain in Brisbane. I was coming from the Gold Coast and I
got on the train at Nerang to go to the airport knowing I didn't
have to change trains. We went through Brisbane Central and Out
to the Airport where there are two stops - one for the
International terminal and one for the Domestic Terminal.

That's something I wish we had here in Melbourne (not that I go
to the airport that much), Even if we had such a train in
Melbourne, You would have got on a Flinders Street train, then
got into Flinders Street and had to get off and find the Airport
train from some other platform (or even if it was the train you
got off you wouldn't know that until you got off and that can be
confusing when you are coming in to Flinders Street and the
train is telling you this is the end of the line - If you get on
at one of the loop stations on the way IN to the city for
instance it says where the train is going at the platform which
you can't find out on the train and that gets confusing....)

It was also a nice change to see real people employed by QR - I
bought my ticket from a human being (who even made jokes!) and
the train had an actual conductor with a whistle and everything
- I haven't seen that in quite a few years on a Melbourne
train... And at the end my ticket was checked by a human being
again and from there even I found my where to where I was
going...

It was nice.

Regards

OgO
--
My Freeware: http://qjc.cjb.net/freeware.html
My Win9x Cursors: http://qjc.cjb.net/cursors.html
ICQ: 12889482 - AIM/Yahoo: quentisl - MSN: quentisl@mail.com
I left my Glasses in my email - you better take them out!

Converted from aus.rail usenet news

mjja · Posted: Mon Jan 13, 2003 4:43 pm

If CountryLink really want to get some people off the planes, they need to compete. Not on price - that leads to cost cutting where it hurts. They need to improve their service.

Here's an example from my own experience. We were going to Canberra and Sydney for business (from Melb) and we needed to take several boxes of books (our stock-in-trade) with us. On the plane we just arrive early, check it in, pay $10 or so per box, and on they go. But on the train, NOT ONLY is there a rule against carrying cardboard boxes (WHY ON EARTH NOT?) but we didn't find out about the rule until we changed from train to bus at Yass Junction. The rules were printed on the inside of the ticket where nobody looks, and we didn't see the rules until after we'd bought the ticket.

The bus driver who took us from Yass to Canberra was nice - he saw that the boxes weren't going to give trouble and just put them on. But then when we tried to get onto the Xplorer at Canberra, the "customer service manager" planted his feet firmly in the bureaucratic book of regulations and wouldn't let us get on the train. So we had to hire a car and drive to Sydney.

Now CountryLink should be in a prime position to increase their passengers quite a bit. What with the demise of Ansett, the fights over facilities at Sydney airport, and the ongoing problem of the airport's capacity, rail travel should be a viable alternative to air. (More legroom, better view, and no deep-vein thrombosis!)

Of course we know the Melb-Syd-Bris rail corridoor desperately needs to be upgraded, but while we wait for someone to find a few billion dollars for that, let's get the easier stuff in good order.

trainfreak · Posted: Tue Jan 21, 2003 10:11 am

Thomas the tank engine · Posted: Mon Mar 24, 2003 7:01 pm

I agree totally with the need for a high speed rail link between syd-cbr-mel. It's ridiculous to take over 4 hours to travel to canberra from sydney and almost 11 hours to melbourne. And what about the need for a better service on board the train. Would it be better to have airline style service to entice customers, on board entertainment just like those in planes, or am i asking too much from a collapsing rail system?

K163 · Posted: Mon Mar 24, 2003 7:42 pm

three words for you, Spirit Of Progress.

It has airline service, but without the T.V.'s

Regards,
Craig Walton
What I say here is my thoughts, and doesn't represent the MRPS or Woolworths ltd... smeg imagine it did!

If you want to loose weight, don't eat anything that comes in a BUCKET!

Aussie Cow · Posted: Mon Mar 24, 2003 8:15 pm

Ok, train travel is generally more expernsive, and slower than air travel, however I'll now have a look at what you get depending on what you travel on.

A trip from Central to Spencer Street (Sydney to Melbourne) on the train is slowish (although speeds of 115kph plus are reached and held only 40km out of Sydney) while a plane trip is very fast reaching speeds of more than three times that of the XPT. So of course if travelling for business at short notice (which chances are would require a late booking fee to be paid) plane is the only option. For a pre-planned business trip, train would give you the chance to relax on your way down, however plane would mean you could go down there, and depending on how much business you have to do, you could be home to your family or friends the same day. So on the business front, plane wins.

Now for a family holiday to Melbourne (mind you I think you'd be slightly crazy to leave NSW for Victoria ONLY JOKING), driving would actually seem the way most people would go, mainly for the lack of cost if you don't have to purchace accommodation and stayed at friends. However, out of rail and air, both have equal claims. We'll look at plane first. Plane will again get you down there quickly, with minimal fuss, however waiting in airport terminals with kids for your gear to come around will take its toll on you. Also organising everyones bags will take a while. Plane also is less personal than train. Now we look at train, this is the only time where train is likely to be cheaper than plane. A long trip will give the kids lots to look at, lots to do, not to mention they won't get in trouble for walking around to stretch their legs. You also know that you're travelling on the safest land transport in the world. On planes, they request that unless needed you remain in your seat, on trains you're welcomed to walk through to the bar. So if the family has done their planning, chances are they will take the train than catch a plane, if they haven't however, who knows.

For the railfan, train is the only way to go. For an airfan (if such a thing can be) plane is the way to go.

Now, the VFT (Very Fast Train), both Sydney - Canberra and Sydney - Melbourne.
The cost for building a VFT between Sydney and Canberra would be much more than the income from revenue. Think about it, although CountryLink does run six Explorers a day (three in each direction) to the nation's capital, these are only three car trains, and rarely seem to have more than one car of passengers, so yes, the cost of running trains to Canberra must be less than that of the income from those trips. However, a VFT would require a totally new alignment, if a VFT could be built following the current alignment, then a Sydney - Canberra VFT link might be viable, as long as there was passenger demand for such a link which at the moment I don't believe there is.

A VFT between Sydney and Melbourne is a totally different thing, there is clearly demand for such a link, but there is real will to expend the money to build such a link. If you could travel from Sydney to Melbourne for less than on a plane, in the same amount of time or slightly more on a train, then people will travel by train.

The thing is, the SRA of NSW isn't doing enough to get people back on trains, although there was (and believe still is) heavy advertising to get people using the Airport Link which is much faster and cheaper than any other means of transport to and from the airport so rail is doing something right there, however only people coming from Sydney's south-west can get the airport without changing trains, all other people have to change trains at either Wolli Creek, or Central (people coming from the south coast can change trains at Wolli Creek, people coming from the north shore can change trains at Town Hall or Central, people coming from the eastern suburbs (Bondi, Kings Cross) people from the west change at Central) which with baggage can be a little bit of a hassle which is where car has its advantage, but on the whole, travelling to the airport, rail is the only way to go.

Then, we have QR, which is actually doing a great job to get people on trains with the 'Tilt train', fast, modern, and from what I'm told, cheapish. It is actually taking traffic away from the airlines, so GOOD ON QR!!!

mjja · Posted: Tue Mar 25, 2003 9:02 am

Yes I agree with most of that. But don't write off the Syd-Can VFT yet - Sydney Airport is in dire straits with lack of capacity, and Canberra is under-utilised. A VFT between them would allow Canberra to function as Sydney's second airport - it would be quicker to VFT into Sydney (assuming a reasonably frequent service) than to take even a good airport rail link from any other second airport site around Sydney.

This was all said back in about 1990, so if they'd gone with it it could have been ready for the Olympics.

Happy Gunzelling and remember, "Go by rail!"

Michael Angelico
President, Smart Passengers Inc
(My opinions are my own unless specifically stated.)

Aussie Cow · Posted: Tue Mar 25, 2003 2:33 pm

Yes, that's true, and it has been known for a long time that Sydney airport is reaching bursting point, however, I don't believe Canberra can take the bigger planes, meaning that Sydney (airport) would become the international hub and Canberra (airport) the domestic hub.

According to information I have, a pilot who doesn't muck around can fly from Sydney to Canberra in about 30 minutes, that excludes taxing times which could be over 15 minutes at each end. I believe that one planned alignment for the Sydney - Canberra VFT would mean that a possible travel time of 30 minutes could be achived.

So if you had services every 40 minutes which includes turn around time (i.e. two trains running with a back-up) I think you would have a very viable option to air travel, both between Sydney and the nation's capital but for people coming in from overseas and wishing to hop on a plane to say Alice Springs.

Anyone have anything to say about this?

PS: Say you built the second airport at Camden (which there has been talk of happening. For those of you who don't know, Camden is located about 15km from Campbelltown) you'd have to catch a bus from Camden (you'll see I've done my homework on the area) to Campbelltown station which would take about 25 minutes, then catch a train from Campbelltown, the quickest I've ever travelled from Campbelltown to Wolli Creek is about 30 minutes, so yes VFT (Sydney - Canberra) plus Sydney's second airport at Canberra might just become viable.

K163 · Posted: Tue Mar 25, 2003 3:52 pm

i reckon they should bring in a rail system simular to England's one, over there they run trains every 20 mins (i think) between London and Inveness (top of Scotland), only takes 8 hrs. The only drawback is the people that maintain the track, it has come to that they have to close 60 KM sections of the line to do maintenence. But anyway, the trains there go 125MPH+ (200 KM/hr).

Regards,
Craig Walton
What I say here is my thoughts, and doesn't represent the MRPS or Woolworths ltd... smeg imagine it did!

If you want to loose weight, don't eat anything that comes in a BUCKET!

mjja · Posted: Tue Mar 25, 2003 4:26 pm

Thomas the tank engine · Posted: Sat Mar 29, 2003 10:22 am

How about a frequent riders program, just like the frequent flyer program? This might just attract more passengers, especially on short routes such as Sydney-Canberra!

Aussie Cow · Posted: Sat Mar 29, 2003 11:50 am

mjja · Posted: Mon Mar 31, 2003 10:21 am

That is exactly the problem with most transport planning today. They just say "How many people go there now" and don't take into account the fact that if there's a good comfortable fast convenient way to go, people will buy a house in Jindabyne and work in Sydney.

Happy Gunzelling and remember, "Go by rail!"

Michael Angelico
President, Smart Passengers Inc
(My opinions are my own unless specifically stated.)

Thomas the tank engine · Posted: Mon Mar 31, 2003 7:06 pm

Aussie Cow,

Very thorough explanation, well done!!!!

One point to note though... have u taken into account the fact that planes get delayed more often than trains? While the actual flight might only be 50 minutes in duration, sometimes it can take longer to travel to canberra by plane than by train..

Aussie Cow · Posted: Mon Mar 31, 2003 7:26 pm