• Our booking engine at tickets.railforums.co.uk (powered by TrainSplit) helps support the running of the forum with every ticket purchase! Find out more and ask any questions/give us feedback in this thread!

Flight shaming

Status
Not open for further replies.
Joined
24 Jun 2014
Messages
432
Location
Derby
Apparently, the Swedes have a name for it: flygskam.

Following Greta Thunberg's trip around Europe some weeks ago, the Guardian published an article about her journey and the growth in demand for rail travel in Sweden - see https://www.theguardian.com/environ...-train-journey-through-europe-flygskam-no-fly

Today, a further article about "green" travel - often by rail - has appeared on the Guardian website at: https://www.theguardian.com/travel/2019/may/22/could-you-give-up-flying-meet-the-no-plane-pioneers

So two questions; will flight shaming catch on here in the UK, and - perhaps more importantly - could our rail network cope with a significant growth in long distance rail travel resulting from it?
 
Sponsor Post - registered members do not see these adverts; click here to register, or click here to log in
R

RailUK Forums

Bletchleyite

Veteran Member
Joined
20 Oct 2014
Messages
97,542
Location
"Marston Vale mafia"
The real shame is we still don't have a decent link between the WCML and Heathrow.

People take connecting flights primarily because that's the only way to be sure you won't lose your money if they misconnect. Perhaps there is a need for some codesharing with trains? It's been done in other countries for years.

For the number of passengers connecting in this way, BA could probably manage a Watford Jn-Heathrow coach.
 

ForTheLoveOf

Established Member
Joined
7 Oct 2017
Messages
6,416
People take connecting flights primarily because that's the only way to be sure you won't lose your money if they misconnect. Perhaps there is a need for some codesharing with trains? It's been done in other countries for years.

For the number of passengers connecting in this way, BA could probably manage a Watford Jn-Heathrow coach.
Codesharing works in other countries where there are direct Intercity-style services from the airport. No such luxury at Heathrow - it's been designed, in terms of rail access, for Londoners and not anyone else.
 

TheGrew

Member
Joined
31 Jul 2012
Messages
334
I have done a couple of UK domestic flights once to connect via Heathrow (Manchester->Heathrow->Bucherest) and a couple of times to return to the South Coast (Manchester <-> Southampton). My wife has also done Exter to Manchester. On all of these journeys the train could have been used but I concluded it was easier or substantially quicker to fly. I gather as well the Edinburgh <-> London air market is also large as it is often cheaper than the train (though I gather the new First Open Access Operator wants some of this pie!). I can't really see much of a modal shift happening until HS2 is built and ticket prices are correct. I also like the idea of code shares as above. I believe the only UK operator which currently does this is Eurostar?
 

ChiefPlanner

Established Member
Joined
6 Sep 2011
Messages
7,768
Location
Herts
People take connecting flights primarily because that's the only way to be sure you won't lose your money if they misconnect. Perhaps there is a need for some codesharing with trains? It's been done in other countries for years.

For the number of passengers connecting in this way, BA could probably manage a Watford Jn-Heathrow coach.

There was a Virgin sponsored one for a while , trouble is you are an absolute hostage of fortune on the M25 ......
 

Reliablebeam

Member
Joined
14 Jun 2017
Messages
247
This issue flares up once every few years, with the plane becoming the mortal enemy of civilisation that must be eliminated, in the eyes of the Guardian and others.

Look, if I didn't like trains and use them I wouldn't be here but I think I speak for a lot of my colleagues (Thames valley based) when I say Manchester is probably our northernmost rail tolerance limit,and a few colleagues will fly there. And my workplace is very much a bastion of Champaign socialism and Guardian-is-the-holy-text and monbiot the anointed prophet so I suspect any flight shaming in this country will be upper middle class 'do as i say not as i do' dinner party nonsense.

Long distance train travel is a real chore in this country, frequently crowded, gouging fares for short notice travel (although it can be a pleasure on an unusual or boutique line off the beaten track e.g Chester/north Wales/Shrewsbury). The environment is a valid concern but the as some posters have indicated the railway in its current form is unlikely to absorb large numbers of people displaced from the air. And as for that disgrace called Crosscountry? I have and will flown to avoid that shower.
 

Andrew*Debbie

Member
Joined
1 Feb 2017
Messages
315
Location
Llanfairpwllgwyngyll ...
People take connecting flights primarily because that's the only way to be sure you won't lose your money if they misconnect.

We have comprehensive travel insurance that covers the cost. We still would loose time and possibly have to abandon the trip.


I have done a couple of UK domestic flights once to connect via Heathrow

We have twice, both times through Manchester. Once our flight was delayed due to fog at LHR. Our four hour layover was reduced to a frantic sprint across terminal 5. The other time our flight from LAX was delayed and we missed the return connection. We got home but our luggage didn't.

Since then we've always taken the train to a direct departure, usually from LHR.
 

krus_aragon

Established Member
Joined
10 Jun 2009
Messages
6,042
Location
North Wales
How ironic that I find this thread when I've just gotten home after my first airline flight in over a decade... :rolleyes:

But it was a transatlantic flight, taken at short notice to attend a family funeral. Even if passenger liners were still a thing, I'd have been far too late arriving there. So it'd be a bit of work to induce a feeling of flight-shame in me for that. (It'd be easier to make me feel bad about the price of the flights...)
 

coppercapped

Established Member
Joined
13 Sep 2015
Messages
3,094
Location
Reading
Apparently, the Swedes have a name for it: flygskam.

Following Greta Thunberg's trip around Europe some weeks ago, the Guardian published an article about her journey and the growth in demand for rail travel in Sweden - see https://www.theguardian.com/environ...-train-journey-through-europe-flygskam-no-fly

Today, a further article about "green" travel - often by rail - has appeared on the Guardian website at: https://www.theguardian.com/travel/2019/may/22/could-you-give-up-flying-meet-the-no-plane-pioneers

So two questions; will flight shaming catch on here in the UK, and - perhaps more importantly - could our rail network cope with a significant growth in long distance rail travel resulting from it?
Reliablebeam in post #7 has hit the nail on the head. The only people who can reduce the number of flights they take because they can either (a) take longer for the journey or (b) avoid the journey completely are those in the fortunate position of being able to do so and so signal their virtue.

Most of the rest of us can afford neither the time nor in many cases the extra cost of alternative methods of travel.
 

Mutant Lemming

Established Member
Joined
8 Aug 2011
Messages
3,194
Location
London
As UK rail travel has nearly doubled in the last 20 years, we're already doing a great job in getting people to shift from road and air to rail. Rather old numbers, but we're the 6th ranked country in terms of rail's share of journeys too

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/List_of_countries_by_rail_usage

Road traffic has increased though and continues to do so - which kind of negates all that
https://www.theguardian.com/environment/2009/mar/18/road-emissions-traffic
https://www.theguardian.com/world/2...raffic-increased-record-22-per-cent-last-year
I would suggest rather than people switching from road to rail the increases are due to (1. An Increase in the Population, (2.People without access to a car making more journeys.

The only real way to switch to green transport is to walk.
 

Meole

Member
Joined
28 Oct 2018
Messages
452
Eurostar only serves London, who on earth would go by train to Amsterdam, Brussels, Paris from Manchester for work ? Cost and time dictate otherwise.
 

samuelmorris

Established Member
Joined
18 Jul 2013
Messages
5,121
Location
Brentwood, Essex
It's difficult to know what to suggest. You'll never achieve 'green travel' without greening the car - the way this country's infrastructure has developed effectively prohibits public transport ever re-attaining its status from the early 20th century. Yet long distance journeys take too long by car for the 70mph speed limit (all too often 50 these days due to perpetual road upgrades) and the same by train due to the lack of expedient connecting services at either end. Unless you happen to live in the same city as a railway hub e.g. York, using the train is also too slow to be worthwhile doing over a certain distance. Even HS2 will struggle to overcome that compared to flight times, say between Southern England and Scotland. Shorter distances though the train is usually equally viable IF the fares are appropriate. All too often they're not.

I'd like to see air travel relegated to international journeys only but I don't really see how it can at the moment.
 

quantinghome

Established Member
Joined
1 Jun 2013
Messages
2,262
Road traffic has increased though and continues to do so - which kind of negates all that
https://www.theguardian.com/environment/2009/mar/18/road-emissions-traffic
https://www.theguardian.com/world/2...raffic-increased-record-22-per-cent-last-year
I would suggest rather than people switching from road to rail the increases are due to (1. An Increase in the Population, (2.People without access to a car making more journeys.

The only real way to switch to green transport is to walk.

Road traffic in the UK has actually stayed broadly at the same level for the past 20 years. This reflects the slowing of road investment over that time (compared to the 50s-70s hey day).

The increase in rail use is not particularly related to population increase; while rail use has more than doubled since the mid-90s, population has only increased by about 10%. It's more due to changes in living and working patterns. With more people living and/or working in the nearest big city, rail becomes the obvious transport mode for more people. Plus investment is paying off, as the growth on the WCML shows.

Walking, yes, but let's not forget bikes too. And remember over 50% of electricity is now from low carbon sources so electric trains are getting greener all the time.
 

Dougal2345

Member
Joined
29 Oct 2009
Messages
547
The only people who can reduce the number of flights they take because they can [...] avoid the journey completely are those in the fortunate position of being able to do so and so signal their virtue.
Except surely almost any air journey is avoidable? You want to visit your family in other-country-x...? It's lovely that you can do it now at little cost (to yourself), but it's unlikely that you actually need to, unless you're donating a kidney to your mum or something. So send them a letter, make a 'phone call, Skype them instead...
 

Mutant Lemming

Established Member
Joined
8 Aug 2011
Messages
3,194
Location
London
The only way forward will be to introduce a tax that reflects the true damage of air travel say around £200 to £300 per flight - this will cut travel down to all but really necessary journeys for most people. it will never happen of course as the airlines and airports (like the motor industry) have a powerful lobby and their short term personal financial interests will prevail over the long tern global interests of the planet's population.
 

Mutant Lemming

Established Member
Joined
8 Aug 2011
Messages
3,194
Location
London
Except surely almost any air journey is avoidable? You want to visit your family in other-country-x...? It's lovely that you can do it now at little cost (to yourself), but it's unlikely that you actually need to, unless you're donating a kidney to your mum or something. So send them a letter, make a 'phone call, Skype them instead...

I will miss my day trips to Bydgoszcz and Aarhus but I can live without them.
 

quantinghome

Established Member
Joined
1 Jun 2013
Messages
2,262
Eurostar only serves London, who on earth would go by train to Amsterdam, Brussels, Paris from Manchester for work ? Cost and time dictate otherwise.

Not necessarily. I've done Leeds-Brussels by train a few times. Not for work, but I'd certainly consider it for a business trip. It's quicker than (say) Leeds-Plymouth.
 

Randomer

Member
Joined
31 Jul 2017
Messages
314
Having booked a European trip recently the low cost operators really make the economics of travelling by rail hard to justify.

Ryanair was £90 return with baggage fees etc Vs LNER, Eurostar and DB at £350. Would personally have preferred train just for the experience of the journey but costs dictate otherwise.

I think in Sweden the market for the main intercity routes make a good comparison to air travel. Journey times are competitive and prices have come down with 2 operators doing Stockholm - Gothenburg (they also price air line style for each train which makes the comparison even more apparent when booking.)

In the UK train without splitting and other methods to reduce prices often seems poor value compared to flights for London to Scotland routes even when booked far in advance.
 

Scottychoo

Member
Joined
10 Dec 2018
Messages
129
None of the hypocritical climate change Gestapo will ever shame me into not flying, in fact I may fly even more. When China, India, USA etc cut their emissions then people in the little old UK may, just may, take climate change seriously
 

BigCj34

Member
Joined
5 Apr 2016
Messages
761
In the case of myself, having a railcard has made rail journey prices cost no more than flying at worst, and most of the time cheaper when airport when factoring in airport transfers. Considering most places I want to get to are within a 7 hour journey from where I live I'll happily spend a couple of extra hours on the train. For those paying full price however, aviation often wins out in cost as well.

There is only so much the train can do for European trips though. Even with a pan European 300km/h network across Europe rail transport would never be affordable enough or quick enough to be able to go pop over to Sofia by train, such cases call for a re-evaluation of our lifestyle and travel priorities. As a society we may need to roll back on city weekend getaways (where overtourism is becoming increasingly detrimental to them) and focus more on quality tourism where one might visit a wider region for a week that incldues a city, rather than just two days in a capital. Stag weekends in Europe may have to become a thing of the past!
 

Dougal2345

Member
Joined
29 Oct 2009
Messages
547
None of the hypocritical climate change Gestapo will ever shame me into not flying, in fact I may fly even more. When China, India, USA etc cut their emissions then people in the little old UK may, just may, take climate change seriously
I burn tyres in my garden for the hell of it too. I mean, someone somewhere else in the world is burning tyres right now, so why shouldn't I?
 

squizzler

Established Member
Joined
4 Jan 2017
Messages
1,903
Location
Jersey, Channel Islands
Road traffic in the UK has actually stayed broadly at the same level for the past 20 years. This reflects the slowing of road investment over that time (compared to the 50s-70s hey day).

The increase in rail use is not particularly related to population increase; while rail use has more than doubled since the mid-90s, population has only increased by about 10%. It's more due to changes in living and working patterns. With more people living and/or working in the nearest big city, rail becomes the obvious transport mode for more people. Plus investment is paying off, as the growth on the WCML shows.

Walking, yes, but let's not forget bikes too. And remember over 50% of electricity is now from low carbon sources so electric trains are getting greener all the time.

I also suspect motoring was at its peak popularity with the 2009 article linked. I disagree with your assertion that investment in motoring has decreased, in fact the fuel duty escalator was quit and not restarted when we had a windfall off low oil prices, representing a considerable amount of support.

Reliablebeam in post #7 has hit the nail on the head. The only people who can reduce the number of flights they take because they can either (a) take longer for the journey or (b) avoid the journey completely are those in the fortunate position of being able to do so and so signal their virtue.

Most of the rest of us can afford neither the time nor in many cases the extra cost of alternative methods of travel.

LOL, 'signal their virtue', indeed. Who taught you to troll, your mum? Actually non-fly travel is more fun, as shown on that recent BBC gameshow where pairs of contestants had to race from London to Singapore.
 

d9009alycidon

Member
Joined
22 Jun 2011
Messages
838
Location
Eaglesham
As someone who regularly flies within the UK and Europe on Business, I would more than welcome a change to rail travel as my company will sanction first class rail travel, by biggest obstacle is that most of the companies that I visit are not in town or city centres, and the benefit of flying is that there will always be a car rental hub to get me transport to my eventual destination, I have got round this by taking the train to (for example) Birmingham International, where the car hire compound is just as handy for the train as for the airport. If only some of the main stations had car hire facilities I would use them more.
 

TheGrew

Member
Joined
31 Jul 2012
Messages
334
As someone who regularly flies within the UK and Europe on Business, I would more than welcome a change to rail travel as my company will sanction first class rail travel, by biggest obstacle is that most of the companies that I visit are not in town or city centres, and the benefit of flying is that there will always be a car rental hub to get me transport to my eventual destination, I have got round this by taking the train to (for example) Birmingham International, where the car hire compound is just as handy for the train as for the airport. If only some of the main stations had car hire facilities I would use them more.
That's a really interesting point I hadn't really thought about. The only inner city station I can immediately think of with car hire is Manchester Piccadilly, looking at the Google Maps Southampton Central also has one opposite.
 

Bletchleyite

Veteran Member
Joined
20 Oct 2014
Messages
97,542
Location
"Marston Vale mafia"
LOL, 'signal their virtue', indeed. Who taught you to troll, your mum? Actually non-fly travel is more fun, as shown on that recent BBC gameshow where pairs of contestants had to race from London to Singapore.

That kind of journey, as travel in its own right, is certainly enjoyable (and I wish I'd known about that show as I'd definitely have applied to go on it) - but if you just want to get somewhere it's a bit of a nuisance.
 

ashkeba

Established Member
Joined
13 May 2019
Messages
2,171
I burn tyres in my garden for the hell of it too. I mean, someone somewhere else in the world is burning tyres right now, so why shouldn't I?
Indeed. I punch little old ladies in the face because someone somewhere else is murdering, so why not?

Or maybe more relevantly, is it OK to "donut" a journey just because others don't have any tickets at all? This seems a very silly argument in favour of an unethical practice.
 

quantinghome

Established Member
Joined
1 Jun 2013
Messages
2,262
I also suspect motoring was at its peak popularity with the 2009 article linked. I disagree with your assertion that investment in motoring has decreased, in fact the fuel duty escalator was quit and not restarted when we had a windfall off low oil prices, representing a considerable amount of support.

Looking over the long term (from 1945) investment in road capacity has certainly reduced compared to the years of the big shift towards car use from the 1950s to early 1970s. Growth in car traffic thereafter was more modest, then plateaued from the mid-1990s. There have been no major new additions to the strategic road network for at least a couple of decades and major urban roads were mostly done in the 60s and 70s. Widening of existing roads and more modest local improvements have happened, perhaps more so over the past few years with a more pro-road government in place, but it's small change compared to what was done in the decades of the mid-20th century.
 
Status
Not open for further replies.

Top