Rail, Not Air!
Posted by jonathanfryer on Wednesday, 22nd August, 2007
Ryanair has been barred by the Advertising Standards Authority (ASA) from claiming its flights from London to Brussels are cheaper and quicker than Eurostar — and a jolly good thing too! The ASA said the claim was misleading, because it ignored the time taken traveling from the city centres to the somewhat far-flung airports serving the two capitals — Stansted and Charleroi — as well as the cost involved. With typical disdain, Ryanair has declared that these details were ‘irrelevant’ and that ‘only the very rich or the very slow waste their time on Eurostar’.
Eurostar, which will be even quicker once the new high-speed rail-link is finished and St. Pancras Station opened, has revolutioned my Cross-Channel travelling, whether to Brussels or Paris. I wouldn’t dream of flying instead, and indeed on one occasion recently point blank refused to do so when an assignment involved my going to Brussels. It’s not just the hassle and horror of airports when they are busy. I object to short-haul flights, when more eco-friendly rail alternatives are available. And there would be no need for airport expansion at Heathrow and Stansted if people switched from air to rail for short haul travel to the Continent. Moreover, as an incentive for better environmental practice, we need to bite the bullet and make it cheaper to go by train and more expensive to fly.
Duncan Borrowman said
I couldn’t agree more Jonathan.
I have travelled to Paris before to conduct an interview in the centre of the city, leaving a central London office, hopping on to Eurostar at Waterloo, emerging at the Gare du Nord. 5 minute taxi ride. Lunch. Film an interview. 5 minute taxi ride. Back on a fast train to Waterloo.
And it is going to get better.
The thought of using Ryanair from Stansted, with the associated painful journeys to and from airports almost fills me with hysterical laughter.
Autolycus said
>>Ryanair has declared that these details were ‘irrelevant’ and that ‘only the very rich or the very slow waste their time on Eurostar’.<<
You’d have to very slow indeed not to see through Ryanair, at the best of times.
Being neither slow nor rich, I shall be taking Eurostar to Paris tomorrow. I shall leave home at a reasonable hour in the morning, and arrive in Paris for lunch having had the chance to read and stretch my legs en route. I shan’t be cursing at security queues, baggage handling delays or the sort of dimwitted “cleverness” that seems to be in charge at firms like Ryanair.
Nicc said
Amazingly though, after Eurostar moves to St Pancras and vacates a purpose built international rail terminal, other continental carriers (ICE or Thalys or eg) will not be given the opportunity to utilise Waterloo International and thereby open up more routes to European destinations. Eurostar no longer hold the passenger service monopoly through the tunnel and yet there have been no sign of any other carriers using it. The vacated platforms are apparently going to be used for South West trains. While there is a lot of congestion at Waterloo, I find it astonishing that there has been no thought at all given to retain the platforms as an international arrival destination.
So Eurostar keep their monopoly. That can’t be a good thing.
Secondly, why the hell does anyone choose to fly on Ryan Air? Surely one of the most irresponsible and dishonest airlines in the business. Incredible the sorts of organisations people are willing to do business with for the sake of a 99p flight.
Jonathan Rawle’s Website » Eurostar beats Ryanair even without check-in said
[...] Eurostar offers by far the more convenient service, and I’m glad to see that the majority of people seem to agree with [...]
Alex Macfie said
I much prefer the train tho the plane. However, Eurostar’s ridiculously inflexible fare structure — where it is next-to-impossible to obtain a one-way ticket for anything less than the full open fare, and cheap fares are all strictly quota-controlled — is likely to put people off. Eurostar assumes that all passengers can be pigeon-holed into one of two categories — “business” travellers, who have unlimited expense accounts, and “leisure” travellers, who *always* want to make a simple return journey to and from the same destinations, and *always* know exactly when they want to travel in both directions. These assumptions simply do not hold water.
Alex Macfie said
Unfortunately, altho’ RyanAir’s claims were way out, British Airways from Heathrow is often cheaper, with more flexible ticketing, than Eurostar.
Eurostar seems completely wedded to the idea that it is an ‘airline without wings’. But given the choice between a real and a fake airline, one might as well go for the real deal.
Jonathan said
@Alex Macfie: I agree that it would be better for Eurostar to me more like taking any other train, rather than an aeroplane. However, at least you can take two bags and whatever liquids you like if you go by Eurostar. They should make much more of the fact that they are not an airline. I can’t agree at all that you may as well “go for the real deal” – I’d pay a few pounds extra for the convenience of not having to fly.
Anonymous said
free car quote
Excellent post. Keep it up!
Alex said
It’s often a lot more than “a few pounds extra” for not flying when it comes to crossing the channel. Anyway, for me the main point of taking the train, rather than flying, is that you can turn up and go without breaking the bank. It’s a major reason why I always take the train for long-distance domestic journeys (I’ve never taken a domestic flight within the UK, and I don’t ever intend to). So the fact that you can’t ‘turn up and go’ on Eurostar at a reasonable fare makes it little different from an airline as far as I’m concerned.
Of course, if flexibility and low cost are important, *and* you want to take whatever liquids and bags you want across the channel, then there’s still the option of going by ferry as a foot passenger
.