Coronavirus in the UK - news, lockdown and discussion
- Thread starter Sasaferrato
- Start date
Orang Utan
Psychick Worrier Ov Geyoor
That’s why I was careful to say tourists/holidays
editor
hiraethified
Of course there are, but the safety of everyone HAS to come first. Far better to wait a a few more weeks than make the same fuck-ups of the past.
editor
hiraethified
When things get back to normal-ish, I really hope we follow France's lead here:
And this too:
France moves to ban short-haul domestic flights
MPs vote to stop flights where the journey could be made by train in under 2.5 hours.
www.bbc.co.uk
And this too:
A few frequent flyers 'dominate air travel'
Those who fly more should be taxed more, and air miles incentives should be banned, campaigners say.
www.bbc.co.uk
We won't, because the same people who oppose air travel also tend to oppose HS2 and other alternatives like widening roads, more motorways etc. That's the problem with the green lobby, they rarely offer any actual answers that can work for many of the problems we face. Our domestic flight situation is also rather different from France as we have no well-developed, truly national, truly high-speed rail network to offer that alternative, and many of our internal flights are to and from islands (Channel Islands, Isle of Man, Hebrides etc) that have no other connection except a ferry, which can easily be even more polluting (to say nothing of the cruise industry and maritime transport). Many of those internal flights went with the collapse of FlyBe anyway. Plus, entire towns rely on our airports for a massive amount of their employment. The worst examples seem to be Crawley and Luton.
The Sussex town hit hardest by COVID-19 and the effect on Gatwick Airport
Coronavirus has crippled employment rates and job losses at Gatwick have had a major impact on many other businesses
Aviation is a cheap and easy target for anyone who is green, unfortunately, even though there are many worse polluters out there.
This is why it needs support, both to help it survive and to help drive the innovation that can keep it competitive in a green world. New fuels and the like. It's certainly possible. Look at how much quieter and more fuel efficient aircraft of today are than the great lumbering behemoths of the 60s. The difference is night and day, even for the same models of aircraft (Boeing 737 MAX compared to the old 737-200 for example). Then there's the social mobility argument that if you make air travel more expensive you just eliminate it as an option for anyone who isn't already rich, which is something everyone should be opposing. How much more of the population would lose the ability to go abroad, go on a nice family holiday, maybe to ever see their family again, if you price it out of their reach? Why would anyone want to go back to the 1950s when only movie stars and millionaires left the country for any reason other than to go and fight in a war?
Really? I find that a very surprising assertion. I'd be interested in seeing some numbers for that as I'd imagine they account for a smallish percentage of the total.
existentialist
Tired and unemotional
beesonthewhatnow
going deaf for a living
Kinda stopped reading at this point as it shows you’re fucking clueless.
TBF on the odd occasion when I go to Scotland, I fly. Cos I don't want to sit on a train for 7 frigging hours and it's been cheaper.
Perhaps a limit on how many flights you can take per year, with a significant sur charge for any more. The rich already do most of the flying anyway.
Perhaps a limit on how many flights you can take per year, with a significant sur charge for any more. The rich already do most of the flying anyway.
editor
hiraethified
Do they really? All of them?
I don't, I take the train. From London to Edinburgh/Glasgow at least, there's probably not a great deal of time saving (if any) once you've done all the to and from airport and checking in faffing.
editor
hiraethified
I'm not sure what route you take, but factoring in the faff of airports, and travelling back into the major cities can reduce the time difference considerably.
London to Edinburgh by train can be as nippy as 4 hours and 16 minutes, and that's without all the stress of airports. But, ultimately, there has to be a trade off made between hyper convenience and the environment, and if that means some people are going to have to factor in a couple more hours for long distance travel by rail in the UK, I'm all for it.
And this needs to be incentivised by reduced rail fares and the price of flights reflecting their full environmental impact (pollution, fuel use, noise etc).
two sheds
Least noticed poster 2007
I always took train from Cornwall to Scotland when I went. I like train journeys - take a good book and some music, sorted. As pointed out unless where you want to go is near an airport you normally have to schedule getting a train anyway. I'm really pleased I don't fly any more, never enjoyed it with the herding through airports, takeoff/landing, waiting for bags, not my favourite use of time.
StoneRoad
heckling from the back!
Newcastle to London or Newcastle to Bristol (ish) have been my usual long distance routes, although I use a car usually these days for most trips.
Only the former had any "by air" alternative and that was way less convenient in terms of the faffing about factor (checking-in, bags etc). In the end counting the "door to door" time Rail was more cost-effective - and I could "work" on the train, which was almost impossible on the small stuff used for internal flights at the time.
Only the former had any "by air" alternative and that was way less convenient in terms of the faffing about factor (checking-in, bags etc). In the end counting the "door to door" time Rail was more cost-effective - and I could "work" on the train, which was almost impossible on the small stuff used for internal flights at the time.
Artaxerxes
Look out, he's got a gnu!
When things get back to normal-ish, I really hope we follow France's lead here:
France moves to ban short-haul domestic flights
MPs vote to stop flights where the journey could be made by train in under 2.5 hours.www.bbc.co.uk
And this too:
A few frequent flyers 'dominate air travel'
Those who fly more should be taxed more, and air miles incentives should be banned, campaigners say.www.bbc.co.uk
It's fine, its not like our Green party are going balls to the wall to stop massive train infrastructure to support stopping flights.
Oh shit.
Why? What's clueless about that, hm? What other alternatives are there apart from trains, cars, buses (which use those same roads), and apparently hurling insults? Elon Musk's hyperloop?
I didn't say all, I said they 'tend to.' Can you find me a green group that opposes HS2 but supports more road traffic?
God forbid I have on opinion on aviation that differs from the axe you are grinding against it...
editor
hiraethified
Why would any sane person support more road traffic?
two sheds
Least noticed poster 2007
the only alternative to HS2 is more road traffic? Not using the huge amount of money that HS2 costs (ignoring the destruction to countryside) to invest in the rest of the rail network?
Why des that surprise you? I thought it was pretty obvious that we had numerous flights to islands. We have flights to Jersey, Guernsey, the Scilly Isles, Isle of Man, Northern Ireland, Lerwick, Benbecula, Sumburgh, Kirkwall, Stornoway, Barra, etc. Many of those flights are also vital for freight, mail, etc. Can't find any stats on the number of flights but the overall number of domestic flights has been steadily falling over the last decade, from 612,000 in 2009 to 484,000 in 2019. There's some more stuff here.
Aviation statistics: data tables (AVI) - GOV.UK (www.gov.uk)
They wouldn't, that's the point.
maomao
普費斯
Where are you going in Scotland that takes seven hours by train and is quicker by plane? London to Edinburgh is as quick as four hours and almost always under 5. We once got very cheap tickets on the slowest train possible and that was only six hours.
editor
hiraethified
No idea where you're going with this strawman stuff but it'd dragging this thread way off topic.
I didn't say it was the only alternative, did I? To be fair to the Green Party, they do seem to support more investment in the rest of the rail network, which is something I can certainly agree with them on. I'm not sure they want to open new lines, though, so anywhere not currently served by one is pretty fucked under their policy.
I don't know about xenon but I went to Aberdeen from Sheffield by train once, and it took seven hours each way.
It does surprise me because the number of people going to these places must be very small compared to the number of people flying from London to Edinburgh or Glasgow, for example. Which is why I'm asking for figures. Also interesting you're now throwing Northern Ireland into the mix. And certainly between Scotland and NI and the Scottish mainland to the Western Isles, freight is mainly transported by ferry.
It's not strawman stuff at all. Just pointing out that the greens who oppose flying also oppose many (though not quite all) of the alternatives such as road travel and HS2. But you're right, way off topic, so that's enough arguing about transport.
Artaxerxes
Look out, he's got a gnu!
HS2 supports the rest of the train network by removing high speed trains from the network to free up slower lines.
Its been marketed and sorted out completely fucking wrong and as always started and aimed at serving London first so inevitably when the protests do shut it down and theres no funding for T'Northern half, we'll be left with half a line serving only London and the cycle will continue.
It gets funnier when you see the Green Party official twitter supporting Eurostar and the French initiative then the next tweet is another "Fuck HS2" tweet
Similar threads
