Let the train take the strain.......

[CarlMetro]

..............erm no thanks, I can't afford the time or the cost.

As part of my job I have to fly to various parts of Europe on a fairly regular basis. I also spend a fair ammount of time driving up and down the UK motorway system.

At the moment I have several customers I need to visit in and around the Aberdeen/Inverness area of Scotland. As much as I enjoy driving, the ten or so hours it takes can be a little tiring to say the least. I get bored with flying too so, I thought, why not take the train?

I contacted the National Rail enquiries website and with some surprise was quoted £167.25 for a journey which will take 8 hours and involve three different train changes.

Easyjet from Luton (20 minutes by car from me) takes one and a half hours and costs £62. Of course there will still be polititians and other people wondering why we don't make more use of the national rail network

[AndySpeed]

It's down to what the consumer wants unfortunately. Whilst flying is not the greenest or most efficient method, it is the quickest which is why you will do it.

Additionally, business practices have changed. Go back 25 years and would it have made as much sense to use cheap flights? Probably not as flying was much more costly. However, to remain competitive it seems that moving so quickly and cheaply is essential today.

And that won't change unless there is a major shift towards rail use for some reason or another. I think that the government should do more to encourage people to use trains, and that includes making them cheaper.

Easyjet/Flybe is not sustainable.

[Dave B]

But there has been a shift towards rail, however because of the way the network is fragmented it discourages competition and investment resulting in train companies now trying to price people off of the more popular routes rather than providing more capacity.

[sal]

If you book far enough in advance and look at single tickets rather than straight returns you can make some big savings...

[BDunnell]

But there has been a shift towards rail, however because of the way the network is fragmented it discourages competition and investment resulting in train companies now trying to price people off of the more popular routes rather than providing more capacity.

Competition on the railways is impossible to achieve, because there isn't the capacity on the tracks. It didn't work in the so-called 'golden era' prior to nationalisation, and it won't work now.

[Dave B]

But that's my point: nobody has any interest in investing to make more capacity. If there was true competition, like the airlines, operators would find a way.

If I want to fly from London to Scotland I've a choice of several airlines offering various levels of service at differing costs. I can pay a pittance and be treated like sub-human scum on Ryanair, or pay a three-figure sum and fly with some dignity on BA. At least I've got that option.

Same when I go to France: I've a choice of Eurotunnel or a couple of ferry operators, each with their own pros and cons.

But with the train, I'm stuck with GNER. Doesn't matter if they're expensive or if the service is bad - they're my only option. If they had to share their route with (say) EasyTrain, O'LearyTrain, and Virgin Beardy Trains; market forces would keep prices down and encourage competition to provide good service.

Of course, none of this would be of any help on an unprofitable rural route - I accept that. I don't have all the answers, I just know that most of Europe manages to run a train service that a county like the UK should be able to emulate.

[BDunnell]

But that's my point: nobody has any interest in investing to make more capacity. If there was true competition, like the airlines, operators would find a way.

If I want to fly from London to Scotland I've a choice of several airlines offering various levels of service at differing costs. I can pay a pittance and be treated like sub-human scum on Ryanair, or pay a three-figure sum and fly with some dignity on BA. At least I've got that option.

Same when I go to France: I've a choice of Eurotunnel or a couple of ferry operators, each with their own pros and cons.

But with the train, I'm stuck with GNER. Doesn't matter if they're expensive or if the service is bad - they're my only option. If they had to share their route with (say) EasyTrain, O'LearyTrain, and Virgin Beardy Trains; market forces would keep prices down and encourage competition to provide good service.

Of course, none of this would be of any help on an unprofitable rural route - I accept that. I don't have all the answers, I just know that most of Europe manages to run a train service that a county like the UK should be able to emulate.

What most of Europe has are nationalised rail networks where competition is largely non-existent. Every experience shows that this is by far the best option. Why else has no other country in the world gone down the UK's route?

[Mark]

But with the train, I'm stuck with GNER.

Not for much longer!
[/quote]

[LotusElise]

Trains would be an excellent way to travel if they ran properly. As it is, they cannot be relied on.
IMHO it is not feasible to run a vital service as if it was a straight business.

[Tomski]

Trains would be an excellent way to travel if they ran properly. As it is, they cannot be relied on.
IMHO it is not feasible to run a vital service as if it was a straight business.

Trains are no different to any other form of transport and occassionally suffer prblems. Why do people have the idea that trains are unreliable whereas road transport is not?