Yes although you only get a £10 discount for exchanging 200 points don't you? Not going to make much of a dent in even the cheapest fare.Isn’t that only if you are redeeming points for a free ticket? Using cash & points doesn’t incur the £16 fee.
Yes although you only get a £10 discount for exchanging 200 points don't you? Not going to make much of a dent in even the cheapest fare.Isn’t that only if you are redeeming points for a free ticket? Using cash & points doesn’t incur the £16 fee.
The promoter basically sums up all the problems as being a lack of political will.
You could look at it from another perspective, which is that it is rather hard to get political support for a proposal that is expensive, would serve a small market, and requires significant changes to some fundamental elements of government policy.
Or put another way ..
“My Sleeper proposal to Europe would work if only Government(s) would force the infrastructure owner(s) to lower their prices, increase taxes on air transport, either join Schengen or introduce expensive border and security controls at all the stations we want to serve, and provide guarantees on funding so that our backers don’t lose money”
Yet again, it’s an answer looking for a question.
Another point here is the market the sleepers serve. There’s no easy way to put this, but in this country at least the sleeper is the near exclusive preserve of people who have plenty of money; they choose the sleeper as an experience, or to save time, but very rarely because it is cheaper than the alternatives.
It would seem odd in this day and age to be spending significant subsidy - and were talking over £100 per passenger - to enable rich people to save a few hours or have a jolly time.
I know this may be controversial!
Marne-la-Vallée and Massy TGV fulfil those criteria. But then you run into the “using LGV Interconnexion with classic stock” problem.I think the key point is "in this country". Elsewhere in Europe sleepers seem not to be priced just for the luxury market, and I'm not aware that they have such a massive subsidy (any more than rail services in general deserve). And by booking ahead, fares can often be comparable with day trains on the same route. My bed from Zurich to Prague a few years back was a few tens of pounds (£40-ish I think); and similarly my bed all the way from Milan to Syracuse a few years ago.
Any subsidy is peanuts compared to the money taken from everyone's taxes to pay for roads - if you count both the direct costs and the massive indirect costs.
NB - the idea of Eurostars to Lille and sleepers from there (as mentioned above) makes some sense for many UK-Europe journeys. But I'd have thought that much of the desire for overnight trains would be from other [than London] parts of Britain direct to Paris/Brussels etc; and from London direct to places significantly further away. Both of these require sleepers through the tunnel, and all the problems (real or invented) that seems to entail. Otherwise (if the tunnel has to be a distinct segment, come what may), for journeys from "before" London to "after" Paris/Brussels you're looking at a minimum of 2 changes en route, and a more fiddly and less attractive journey. (Though personally, as a Londoner wanting to travel around Europe whenever I have the time and money, the idea of an evening London-Lille train, with a seamless connection with sleepers onwards from there, would often suit me. But I guess the sleepers would have to also pick up somewhere else fairly major*, soon after leaving Lille, for passengers starting from northern France or Belgium, since there might not be enough Brits to fill sleepers from Lille - at least until European flights are stopped.) [*Brussels, if heading for northern Europe; a through station as close as possible to central Paris - if such still exists - for other directions. Though if sleepers became more normal again, perhaps a dedicated Paris sleeper terminal, which wasn't an actual "terminal station", could serve the Lille-originating sleepers too. Does Paris have any sort of Kensington Olympia equivalent?]
That's for a relatively uncomplicated service running six nights a week -
That was precisely the logic that produced the original Tunnel sleeper proposal, which resulted in nothing more than some very complicated rolling stock that was eventually sold at a loss to Canada. As soon as you go north of London the stock has to be UK gauge, which increases costs both because it's non-standard and because less space in the upper and lower corners of the cross-section is much more significant for a sleeper than for a day coach, probably ruling out the various two-level configurations that have been used on the Continent. And going beyond Brussels and Paris you're hit with the costs for border formalities at all the origin stations.NB - the idea of Eurostars to Lille and sleepers from there (as mentioned above) makes some sense for many UK-Europe journeys. But I'd have thought that much of the desire for overnight trains would be from other [than London] parts of Britain direct to Paris/Brussels etc; and from London direct to places significantly further away. Both of these require sleepers through the tunnel, and all the problems (real or invented) that seems to entail.
I tend to think reclining seats for the budget market and perhaps the sort of pods used on airline first class for mid-market are the way forward for sleepers, as much more space-efficient than giving everyone a private compartment. But to arrive in the morning fresh and ready for a business meeting you ideally need single compartments with en-suites, and even then I think many people would worry about having a sleepless night and being challenged about why they spent so much more when they could have had the same result from an early morning flight. For an early meeting I'd personally get the train the day before, work on the train and book into a hotel for the night.I may be looking too simply here but could a sleeper train not use some conventional high speed stock suitably converted? People will fly 19 hours in a seat so not even the whole train would need to be beds? Surely London to Barcelona is doable in 12 hours leaving at 9pm from London. Perfect!
Any subsidy is peanuts compared to the money taken from everyone's taxes to pay for roads - if you count both the direct costs and the massive indirect costs.
I may be looking too simply here but could a sleeper train not use some conventional high speed stock suitably converted? People will fly 19 hours in a seat so not even the whole train would need to be beds? Surely London to Barcelona is doable in 12 hours leaving at 9pm from London. Perfect!
Another point here is the market the sleepers serve. There’s no easy way to put this, but in this country at least the sleeper is the near exclusive preserve of people who have plenty of money; they choose the sleeper as an experience, or to save time, but very rarely because it is cheaper than the alternatives.
It would seem odd in this day and age to be spending significant subsidy - and were talking over £100 per passenger - to enable rich people to save a few hours or have a jolly time.
I know this may be controversial!
I may be looking too simply here but could a sleeper train not use some conventional high speed stock suitably converted? People will fly 19 hours in a seat so not even the whole train would need to be beds? Surely London to Barcelona is doable in 12 hours leaving at 9pm from London. Perfect!
...and perhaps the sort of pods used on airline first class for mid-market are the way forward for sleepers, as much more space-efficient than giving everyone a private compartment.
As someone mentioned, this is unique to the UK really
I would suggest that a well developed sleeper network is a sign of the daytime services passengers prefer to travel on failing to meet their needs, usually because they are too slow. This might be best evidenced by the article that talks wistfully of the boat train to Paris as if it was something we should aim to return to!
(In truth I love sleepers as much as anyone and actively try to find excuses to justify using them, but I'm also realistic.)
If governments want to cut flights then legislating against point to point ticket sales between cities with train journeys of under 3 hours would be a good place to start. It would shrink the air market to feeding long haul routes. Its not really relevant to the UK though. Very few people on a Manchester to London flight are going to London. If the route was cut they would either take a direct flight to their destination or fly to an overseas hub airport and change there.
But to arrive in the morning fresh and ready for a business meeting you ideally need single compartments with en-suites, and even then I think many people would worry about having a sleepless night and being challenged about why they spent so much more when they could have had the same result from an early morning flight. For an early meeting I'd personally get the train the day before, work on the train and book into a hotel for the night.
You mean like at Euston....?But people traveling by plane are also expected to arrive fresh and ready to their first morning business meeting too, and all they had to travel is a cramped seat. So they achieve that by using airport facilities (showers, etc) before going to business. Why don’t we have such facilities in stations too ? That would certainly be more efficient than transporting entire bathrooms in train compartments to use them only 20 minutes every day.
A serious professional contributor BTWThread suggesting sleeper trains timed to connect to Eurostar services at Lille:
Good idea. If Paris's sleeper services could be concentrated at Gares du Nord and de l'Est, interchange from London, and from say Benelux to Mediterranean destinations could be very easy.I think the more sensible strategy is for Brussels/Paris to act as sleeper 'hubs' with Eurostar connections.
Austrian Airlines make the journey in 1h20 at £100 - £130, several times a day. So €219 is a mark up of 70 - 100%? What's the markup for? You to enjoy yourself, or the (modest!) time saving.Slightly OT, but I've just priced a single ensuite (needed at my age) from Vienna to Zurich for a month ahead at EUR219. I don't call that a "luxury market" price.
if specifically for sleeper connections that would be low numbers i feel leaving a few seats on a few services after the booked one for this could be viable, offset by charging more for said ticket (e.g. £60-70 for a early morning brussles-London leg of a thru ticket instead of £50 making a Vienna-London couchette £120-130 instead of £110 with issues if you miss your connection)Eurostar connections for sleeper trains are essentially useless unless through tickets are offered, and Eurostar are totally allergic to through tickets for reservation compulsory services.
Austrian Airlines make the journey in 1h20 at £100 - £130, several times a day. So €219 is a mark up of 70 - 100%? What's the markup for? You to enjoy yourself, or the (modest!) time saving.
Austrian Airlines make the journey in 1h20 at £100 - £130, several times a day. So €219 is a mark up of 70 - 100%? What's the markup for? You to enjoy yourself, or the (modest!) time saving.
Eurostar connections for sleeper trains are essentially useless unless through tickets are offered, and Eurostar are totally allergic to through tickets for reservation compulsory services.
Only if one takes the view that a night of sleep in bed on a train is comparable to in a hotel...If you are on a trip where the night train means you save a hotel night, it becomes a very good price compared to flying.
You mean like at Euston....?
€219 was quoted, which is appropriately £200. If the flight costs £100 and the sleeper costs £200, what is the percentage increase? 100%...The percentage is rather less than that