Ryanair Discriminating against families ?

Padraig Breathnach wrote:
> I gather, from a radio interview with one of their managers, that
> Ryanair will continue to charge for checked baggage. So they win.


Since their flights are generaly short, it is less of a problem to not
have any hand luggage. (although this will likely be relaxed shortly to
allow hand luggage but not liquids, and later on hopefully return to normal).


For hoodlums using Ryannair to go to see footbal games, they don't need
any checked luggage. They can just buy their beer at destination. But
for tourists using Ryannair to travel for the weekend, stuff such as
cameras etc are not somethingt you prefer to put in checked luggage.

It will be interesting to see what happens to the channel train
services. (Eurotunnel recently entered bankrupcy protection). I think
that the uglieness in air travel will push more people to drive across
the pond or just take the train.

Arwel Parry wrote:
> Note that *Eurotunnel* is the tunnel operator and if they go broke it
> just means that the British and French governments get the tunnel back
> earlier than 2042 and a lot of banks have a bit of a problem. The
> passenger train operator is *Eurostar*.

However, the LeShuttle service for cars and trucks is operated by
Eurotunnel. Yes, it is under the US equivalent of bankrupcy protection
so it operates normally, but there havbe been cuts in previous months
/years due to cost cutting measures.

The big question is whether Eurotunnel will raise its rates or whether
the paper pushing will affect only the debt management aspects. (or
both). If rates are raised, it may make the train less competitive.

"nobody" <nobody@nobody.org> wrote in message
news:44DD370E.E179492C@nobody.org...
> Arwel Parry wrote:
>> Note that *Eurotunnel* is the tunnel operator and if they go broke it
>> just means that the British and French governments get the tunnel back
>> earlier than 2042 and a lot of banks have a bit of a problem. The
>> passenger train operator is *Eurostar*.
>
> However, the LeShuttle service for cars and trucks is operated by
> Eurotunnel. Yes, it is under the US equivalent of bankrupcy protection
> so it operates normally, but there havbe been cuts in previous months
> /years due to cost cutting measures.
>
> The big question is whether Eurotunnel will raise its rates or whether
> the paper pushing will affect only the debt management aspects. (or
> both). If rates are raised, it may make the train less competitive.

This is subject to market forces.

The problem that ET have is that they cannot charge E*
any more than the do now because E* will just walk
away. When Ryan and EZY will sell you a flight for
20 quid, few people will pay 100s to go by train.

E* once had a model where they tried to charge old-
world airline style return fares of 3-400 pounds, they
can't do this in the new world, prices have to match
the airlines and with all the costs of actually running
the trains to cover there isn't much left of the pie for
the Tunnel.

ET have a choice, charge E* very litte and have some
income or try and charge E* a lot and have zero income.

tim

Arwel Parry wrote:

> In message <44DCE85B.21FA7958@nobody.org>, nobody <nobody@nobody.org>
> writes
>
>> It will be interesting to see what happens to the channel train
>> services. (Eurotunnel recently entered bankrupcy protection). I think
>> that the uglieness in air travel will push more people to drive across
>> the pond or just take the train.
>
>
> Note that *Eurotunnel* is the tunnel operator and if they go broke it
> just means that the British and French governments get the tunnel back
> earlier than 2042 and a lot of banks have a bit of a problem. The
> passenger train operator is *Eurostar*.
>
> Yesterday a plane passenger was transferring to Eurostar every 10
> seconds, according to one of the newspaper sites I read today.
>
Wonder how long it will be before the Islamists transfer their
attentions to Eurostar!

On Sat, 12 Aug 2006 04:32:34 -0500, James Robinson <wascana@212.com>
wrote:
>> can handle it.
>
>I believe the platforms are long enough to handle double-length trains, as
>that was the original intention. It is a regular operation on the French
>side, for sure.

No - or not at Waterloo, anyway. I think you'll find the TGV sets that
run in multiple are shorter than the Eurostar.

Ken wrote:
> On Sat, 12 Aug 2006 04:32:34 -0500, James Robinson <wascana@212.com>
> wrote:
> >> can handle it.
> >
> >I believe the platforms are long enough to handle double-length trains, as
> >that was the original intention. It is a regular operation on the French
> >side, for sure.
>
> No - or not at Waterloo, anyway. I think you'll find the TGV sets that
> run in multiple are shorter than the Eurostar.

A Eurostar train is fixed formation , two power cars, one at each end
and 18 coaches, 2+18 can operate as half sets and a eurostar can rescue
another train, platforms are designed for the full set . or at least
hats what my eurostar seeting plan says. Lots of TVG formations have
less carrages and work in mulitple as required .

Pete wrote:
> Easyjet and Ryanair were recently attempting to entirely eliminate free
> checked baggage on their planes. Now all of their planes leaving the
> UK will have nothing but checked baggage. Too bad, so sad.
>
>
> Pete
I agree the Ryanair online check in and cabin baggage only is 'was
majic , no waiting in check in queues , no waiting at baggage reclaim ,
no chance of loss, saved loads of time ecach end of the flight, sad to
see it go.

Ken <ken@birchanger.com> wrote:

> James Robinson <wascana@212.com> wrote:
>>
>> I believe the platforms are long enough to handle double-length
>> trains, as that was the original intention. It is a regular operation
>> on the French side, for sure.
>
> No - or not at Waterloo, anyway. I think you'll find the TGV sets that
> run in multiple are shorter than the Eurostar.

Yes, now that I've searched around, it appears that they were worried about
the number of operating channels in the tunnel, so purposely made the
trains longer than TGVs. They are 1/4 mile long per set, and carry up to
800 passengers.

It's the TGVs, which are shorter, that run as double sets.

Mike wrote:

> If eurotunnel folds there will be no more tunnel. It has to be maintained,
> staffed etc.

Doubt it. It's too much of a strategic asset. The UK and French
governments would step in, take it over, take on the debt and most
likely franchise its operation. There would be as much disruption as
there will be if UK train operator GNER goes bust as some think they
might - i.e. none whatsoever.

Neil

James Robinson wrote:

> Eurostar points out in their news releases that they still allow passengers
> to carry laptops and cell phones, and use them throughout the trip, plus
> they are allowed to carry their baggage on board, and are not forced to
> check it.

Read "are not able to check it". Eurostar, just like every other
British train operating company, has neither the staff nor the space to
handle checked luggage. Were it forced to do so, the disruptive effect
would be far greater than that on the airlines from the current
debacle.

That said, that won't happen, as you can't do as much damage with a
train as you can with a plane.

Neil