Well I've sadly no myths to contribute myself, but I was very much in agreement on a few of these that most people believe. The 'Virgin Voyagers' thing I've heard too many times with XC, and I actually never knew that about the 180s before. I had always for 15 years and 1 month been of the belief they were ordered specifically for FGW at the time. I'm sure there's other things I learnt and agreed with too, but those were the major ones while I read all 11 pages of this thread today.
Now it's widely known I've left the railway almost 100% (I have a log on my phone of what trains I travelled on last week, which I still find surprising to note I've now had all the 168s again, as well as being shocked I noted the journeys, so I've still not fully got the railway out of my head) and that I have a love of aviation. I really feel the need to comment on the flying haters in this thread, and to provide a former railway nut's view on the topic:
I fly domestically happily over the train. Yes it can take longer overall compared to the train, depending on the actual journey made, but by no means is the train always cheaper! It depends totally on the individual situation a lot, and I have an example from a couple of years ago. It might have been 2017, I'm not sure:
So I was looking up fairly short notice flights (less than 10 days notice) for a London to Scotland journey and back again. Or was it just one way, I can't remember as I seem to have blacked out that part of my UK rail enthusiasm era from the memory banks! Either way, short notice and my love of Ryanair found fares with hand luggage only for £14.99 per person on the Edinburgh to London Stansted journey. In this case, I was flying to London with Blindtraveller, so the airport bus fares didn't come into play, but even with the coach fare into London the whole thing was MUCH cheaper (maybe a third of the train fare) and I won't lie, I loved the flight apart from waiting in the cold to board the plane while the crew arrived. Still, that wait would have been the same at Edinburgh Waverley.
As it was hand luggage only, the whole trip was still much quicker than the train. Even if it had been with hold luggage, it would have been faster as in my experience airports are pretty quick with dealing with bags. I have had a few exceptions with that, obviously. Even if the rail fare had been cheaper, even if by a couple of pounds, in this case the journey would probably have been a 91+MK4s+DVT consist, and I absolutely despise 91s. Especially when they're pushing...Ironically though, I love travel with Virgin but not on the ECML. I hate travelling on that line!
Flying domestically, for me, even back in my heyday as a rail nut, was fun and often chosen over the train. I mean, why travel on a 170 Hereford to Birmingham (or whatever ATW would put out on a trip to Crewe) for travel onwards aboard a 221 (this was before Virgin combined Birmingham to Scotland with one train an hour from London to Birmingham) when I could endure a 170 to Birmingham, enjoy a 390 to Birmingham (again, back before Voyagers infected that route) and fly on a Dash 8 to Glasgow? For me there was zero decisions to be made! Train fare nice and cheap but airfare too expensive? I simply wouldn't go!
As an almost-totally norm person these days, no matter what the railway does the likes of myself and the majority of us will choose flying for the Midlands and south thereof to Scotland. I do however disagree with BA flying Airbus planes from Heathrow to Leeds-Bradford Airport, Manchester Airport and a couple of other rather silly routes. On the flipside, London City to Cardiff/Manchester makes a bit of sense, given its connectivity to central London and how quick and easy LCY is to use.
I could go on for far longer about domestic flying versus the railway! However to do so would rather distract me even further from my very enjoyable beverage...