Flybe Collapses

[jfollows]

And I don't believe it's quicker, even then!

I flew once or twice from Manchester to London when I had meetings in Bedfont Lakes, which is within walking distance of Terminal 4 (once you work out how to get out via the Hilton), and I live close enough to Manchester Airport that I have walked in the past. Even with all this, it wasn't a lot quicker than train given that I certainly walk to Wilmslow station.

EDIT: Given the timing, when I used the flight to get to Bedfont Lakes I will have been living in central Manchester, close to Oxford Road station, within easy walk of Piccadilly station, rather than in Wilmslow as I do now. But it probably took me about the same amount of time to get from home to the airport then as now (then by taxi against the main traffic flow, now by train and hike across Manchester Airport from the station to T3).

I once went on the ridiculous Manchester-London flight; ridiculous because it tends to spend more time circling Watford than in making progress. Anyway, this was with BA but before Terminal 5 had been built. When we landed it was announced that we were going to a stand at Terminal 2, rather than the planned Terminal 1. This confused the ground staff so we had to wait 15 minutes before we could get off. In the interim I watched a coffin being offloaded from the cargo hold. I was sitting next to someone who was going to central London, I think for the first time, so I probably said something like "if I were you, I'd go by train next time".

 

[Bletchleyite]

Even going by car is better for the planet then flying.

And cars are increasingly lower-emission and electric - so there's a solution there as the electricity supply becomes more carbon-neutral.

 

[Bletchleyite]

Peoples' mindsets need to change - travel time can be productive time, and let's not be slavish to 9-5 any more.

Yes, this. If anyone is organising 9am meetings that people have to travel to they just need to pack it in. Organise a lunch or early afternoon meeting if you do need it in person. Then people can go by train both ways and work during the journey.

 

[edwin_m]

And cars are increasingly lower-emission and electric - so there's a solution there as the electricity supply becomes more carbon-neutral.

But that won't solve the congestion, noise or safety issues with car use. And it won't fully eliminate local pollution as there will still be tyre particulates.

 

[Bletchleyite]

But that won't solve the congestion, noise or safety issues with car use. And it won't fully eliminate local pollution as there will still be tyre particulates.

No, but it's substantially better than air travel, and increasingly so, given that air travel has no viable plan to do anything other than burn dead dinosaurs in quite huge quantities.

 

[miami]

Who gives a rats ass about the numbers... Business trips have to be made.... Road and rail can be too slow... So plane wins and always will... The answer is not banning flying but working to reduce aviation emissions.

Plane doesn't win when people won't pay enough for the service to survive.

A carbon tax, applied to planes, trains and automobiles, would be a far better approach. Based on current petrol tax, that would mean about £85 for a Manchester-Exeter flight. People flying to sign major deals won't mind that I'm sure, and people saving 6 hours travel won't mind either - that's barely above minimum wage.

No, but it's substantially better than air travel, and increasingly so, given that air travel has no viable plan to do anything other than burn dead dinosaurs in quite huge quantities.

To be fair, air travel is safer than car travel.

 

[krus_aragon]

To be fair, air travel is safer than car travel.

But (to be excessively flippant) I need to use a car to get to the airport!

 

[Bletchleyite]

To be fair, air travel is safer than car travel.

It is, but if you're bothered about that you can go by train (or coach, which being professionally driven has a better safety record than driving yourself), and if you're not car travel is better for the environment than air travel and will get better.

In essence, you should consider all of the other options before deciding to fly.

 

[dk1]

Depends when the start and end points are. I have n/w-based colleagues that do it and even with the airport shenanigans at either end it's still two hours quicker for them door to door than using the train.

Roll on HS2. What with stations at Manchester Airport & Old Oak Common all points will be covered,

 

[miami]

Aviation emissions per passenger km have halved since 1990.

Is that co2 per passenger-km, or CO2 per seat-km?

One of the big problems with APD is that it's not charged on empty seats. Replacing with a tax on the CO2 production of the flight would be far better. An 747 with 100 passengers would pay far more tax than a full 787 for instance, where at the moment it's the other way round. Shifts the burden away from the passenger and onto the airline.

1990 BMW 318 227g/km https://www.carfolio.com/specifications/models/car/?car=14421
2020 BMW 318 132g/km https://www.carfolio.com/specifications/models/car/?car=643159

or coach, which being professionally driven has a better safety record than driving yourself

Been enough coach crashes over the last few years that I'd stick with the train from a safety point of view.

But (to be excessively flippant) I need to use a car to get to the airport!

10 miles in a car to an airport then flying 300 miles, then 10 miles at the far end, is safer than driving 300 miles.

However it causes more damage to the planet, so how the cost of climate change is apportioned should be looked at too. Hence a carbon tax. I'd suggest the proceeds of such tax would then be portioned out evenly to everyone in the country, perhaps as a basic income, although that might create perverse incentives (don't electrify the MML as CO2 output will reduce so your free money will reduce)

 

[krus_aragon]

10 miles in a car to an airport then flying 300 miles, then 10 miles at the far end, is safer than driving 300 miles.

As I said, excessive flippance.

 

[Bletchleyite]

However it causes more damage to the planet, so how the cost of climate change is apportioned should be looked at too. Hence a carbon tax. I'd suggest the proceeds of such tax would then be portioned out evenly to everyone in the country, perhaps as a basic income, although that might create perverse incentives (don't electrify the MML as CO2 output will reduce so your free money will reduce)

It'd be better to use it either electrifying the railways or planting trees.

 

[paul1609]

Working for no more tham 4.5 hours at best?

Me, I'd be working most of the outward journey on laptop plus maybe a couple on the way back too. Total 9-10 hours.

That's a couple of hours I can free up on another day instead.

Peoples' mindsets need to change - travel time can be productive time, and let's not be slavish to 9-5 any more.

On a train that's fine if you are in first class or get a table in standard class and take up the other 3 travellers space.
It also requires that what your working on isn't sensitive. I can quite easily take screen shots from the airline seat behind you on my mobile phone and theres not a great deal you can do about it.
It also requires that the work you do, can be done on a laptop in the first place.

 

[BananaRepublic]

I am interested to see if KLM start Amsterdam to Southampton given the relatively high passenger numbers (more than double Amsterdam - Teesside which KLM serve). over 230k passengers making this journey.
Also interested to see if AerLingus start Dublin to Southampton more than 150k passengers making this journey with no alternative.

KLM withdrew from the SOU - AMS route about 18 months ago.
That left Flybe operating 4x flight M-F +Sun and IIRC 3x on Sat
Previously there were 2x KLM and 4x Flybe flights M-F with a slightly lower number on Sat &Sun.
So Southampton’s busiest international route by far. Clearly an opening for another carrier.
Whether KLM will return we’ll have to wait and see.

There would be a slight irony if Aer Lingus start operating the SOU - DUB route, as this would probably be flown by the Aer Lingus Regional division, which is operated by Stobart Air, one of Flybe’s owners over the last year.

 

[GRALISTAIR]

If most 'Flybe' journeys can be accommodated on the rail network without too much problem, it points to a carbon-reduction success. Internal journeys by rail rather than air in a landmass the size of the UK should surely be a big part of any proper policy on climate change.

Absolutely correct imho. Isles and other places are or should be exceptions but yes.

 

[GRALISTAIR]

But it's not viable for business people who wish to use time semi-productively.

Also correct. Train that is quick but allows work at seat on laptop etc is far better than car imho if FlyBE or air is not an option due to bankruptcy/other/ climate change etc.

 

[BananaRepublic]

Some of Flybe’s other profitable routes are being taken over by other airlines.
From Southampton, Eastern Airways are taking over the airport’s busiest domestic route to Manchester (previously 6x a day) and also to Newcastle, adding to Eastern’s 3x a day flights to Leeds and soon to be launched 2x a day to Teeside/ Darlington route.
Loganair are taking over a number of Flybe routes from Scotland to other parts of the U.K.

 

[mpthomson]

For a lot, yes - but not all, and it could have a big impact on the various smaller islands from which there isn't a rail alternative.

As an example, Channel Islands to Southampton, relied on by many to get to medical appointments etc

 

[Bletchleyite]

As an example, Channel Islands to Southampton, relied on by many to get to medical appointments etc

The services we're talking about that should perhaps go away are those which don't go over water, to be fair.

 

[Belperpete]

As an example, Channel Islands to Southampton, relied on by many to get to medical appointments etc

And likewise from Isle of Mann, where the Manx gov had a contract to fly patients to Liverpool hospital for operations and treatments not available on the island. Patients will likely have missed their operations because of the demise of Flybe.

The services we're talking about that should perhaps go away are those which don't go over water, to be fair.

Agreed, Manchester to Heathrow at budget price was ludicrous. If they had stuck to their core business, of serving the islands and more remote parts of the UK, they might have survived. Unfortunately, Flybe were over-enthusiastic with buying new planes a few years back, and then had to find things for them to do. Easyjet also started to pick off some of their more profitable services, which didn't help.

I do think this debacle shows the Johnson government in a bad light. All their promises of help turned out to be pure bluster and hot air.

 

[TheGrew]

I have done Manchester to Southampton a couple of times which is competitive by train despite the direct routing. The train would be more compelling if the XC voyagers were a pleasanter experience.
I have also done Manchester to Heathrow in order to connect. That is a route that should IMO be dropped when HS2 is built as I anticipate changing and Old Oak Common would make rail quicker. I also imagine BA would want to use the slots for arguably more profitable long haul services.

 

[edwin_m]

On a train that's fine if you are in first class or get a table in standard class and take up the other 3 travellers space

It's quite possible to work on a laptop using only your "share" of the table space in Standard. I've done this with a larger than usual laptop on most train types with tables, including Voyagers.

 

[Bombolino]

The damage to the environment caused by aviation is absolutely miniscule in comparison to other factors. It's about 2%. Attacking aviation to fix the climate problem is not even going to scratch the surface on that issue. It's like the same pathetic gesture of supermarkets charging 10p for a plastic bag. What's the point of doing that when there's usually up to 10 to 20 times more weight of plastic in the packaging of the things that you buy than in the bag that you carry them home in? Also, I find it interesting to read people "expert opinions" about domestic aviation routes. Unless you've actually used them yourself, don't hypothesise about what other people should do. I once did a business trip to Malaga and back in a day. I've also done Frankfurt, Amsterdam and Brussels. There's no other way of doing it in a day unless you fly. People in the South West or Scotland have the same problems moving around the UK. It's 400 miles from Aberdeen to London as the crow flies. Aviation is the only option for business travel if you want to do it in a day.

 

[The Ham]

On a train that's fine if you are in first class or get a table in standard class and take up the other 3 travellers space.
It also requires that what your working on isn't sensitive. I can quite easily take screen shots from the airline seat behind you on my mobile phone and theres not a great deal you can do about it.
It also requires that the work you do, can be done on a laptop in the first place.

Firstly is possible to do some work on your phone, such as replying to emails, so can be done anywhere even if you're standing.

I'm not sure what you are thinking of when you say that work can't be done on a laptop, but with remote access you could have a fairly rubbish laptop and still be able to work on your desktop PC back in the office. This has the added bonus of not holding any data or software locally so is the laptop is lost there's no risk of data in the wrong hands.

Finally good luck with taking photos of a screen and actually getting anything of use. Unless you see someone who you know it's working for a competitor then chances are you'll not know what you've got and therefore not know who to try and sell it to.

Even if you did then chances are that it'll not be that useful anyway.

I know a scientific research company who have provided basic recipe list safe in the knowledge that even with that information that there's so many variables within the generic products specified that it would take months if not years for anyone to get the right mix.

 

[paul1609]

Firstly is possible to do some work on your phone, such as replying to emails, so can be done anywhere even if you're standing.

I'm not sure what you are thinking of when you say that work can't be done on a laptop, but with remote access you could have a fairly rubbish laptop and still be able to work on your desktop PC back in the office. This has the added bonus of not holding any data or software locally so is the laptop is lost there's no risk of data in the wrong hands.

Finally good luck with taking photos of a screen and actually getting anything of use. Unless you see someone who you know it's working for a competitor then chances are you'll not know what you've got and therefore not know who to try and sell it to.

Even if you did then chances are that it'll not be that useful anyway.

I know a scientific research company who have provided basic recipe list safe in the knowledge that even with that information that there's so many variables within the generic products specified that it would take months if not years for anyone to get the right mix.

I'm a Marine Engineer, I have a laptop for emails, it has some specialist diagnostic tools on it. About the only useful work I can do on it on a train for 5 hours to Scotland is answering emails and doing my expenses and playing solitaire. Taking the plane adds about 4 to 5 hours to my working day. Its a no brainer.
Because I live in Kent I very rarely fly on Flybe.

 

[miami]

I once did a business trip to Malaga and back in a day

Good for you. I have colleagues that went to New Zealand for 12 hours. I've done multiple day trips from Manchester to Brussels in the same week.

The argument "I need to be able to do day trips to Miami/Moscow/Munich/Manchester by plane because there's no other way" is literally begging the question.

The damage to the environment caused by aviation is absolutely miniscule in comparison to other factors

In which case a carbon tax, levied on the plane, would have an absolutely miniscule effect. However as margins in airlines are so tight it would encourage flights that are more efficent (i.e. not running 3 empty flights a day from manchester to exeter)

Because I live in Kent I very rarely fly on Flybe.

I find specialist engineers who frequently fly tend to live near Heathrow. Kent is a surprisingly long way away. Our international teams are based in West London, despite storage space being more expensive that other locations, and no need for them to be in London, because access to Heathrow is key.

 

[Djgr]

Depends when the start and end points are. I have n/w-based colleagues that do it and even with the airport shenanigans at either end it's still two hours quicker for them door to door than using the train.

I would be interested in some worked examples. Given that the Manchester London train is only around two hours, the train will always be past the Watford Gap before the plane has even left Ringway.

 

[Djgr]

Also correct. Train that is quick but allows work at seat on laptop etc is far better than car imho if FlyBE or air is not an option due to bankruptcy/other/ climate change etc.

Once a car journey is more than around 40 miles, my employer only pays around 8p per mile AND you would need special dispension. Primarily because the employer doesn't want to be seen as environmentally irresponsible.

 

[PG]

There's no other way of doing it in a day unless you fly. People in the South West or Scotland have the same problems moving around the UK. It's 400 miles from Aberdeen to London as the crow flies. Aviation is the only option for business travel if you want to do it in a day.

If you want to do it in a day then why?
Is it because your time is more valuable than the people who make the journey using other transport modes?

 

[miami]

Is it because your time is more valuable than the people who make the journey using other transport modes?

If that's the case then there's no problem with paying say £500 to fly from Manchester to Aberdeen, the saving of time is well worth it.