P101 – Domestic Air Passenger Duty Reform Watch

This discussion is closed.
barnetlad
Badges: 19
Rep:
?
#21
Report 1 month ago
#21
I am not in favour of what is proposed by this petition. I would like to see APD retained, but based on the number of flights a person makes and the allowance/different rates not transferable, and some differential on flights to parts of Europe where a train option is available in under one day. I want to see fewer flights and no expansion of Heathrow.

As for subsidising links to say Scottish Islands, this should be by a specific route by route subsidy and not a general APD holiday.
0
CatusStarbright
Badges: 22
Rep:
?
#22
Report 1 month ago
#22
(Original post by Miss Maddie)
Northern powerhouse they say. I'm not surprised it's lagging behind when getting there from London takes 3hrs in your anti flying world and 1hr in my pro flying world
London is a poor example, because it is in fact very well connected to other parts of the country. I believe it only takes 2 hours 10 from Leeds and 04 has given other examples. It must also be noted that for flying there is so much more time wasted at the airport, so for a lot of domestic flights while the flight time is a lot quicker, it would be quicker overall to take a train.

As for the idea behind the petition itself, I am inclined in favour as I know that regional operators such as Flybe are important, even key, to links to more isolated parts of the country.
0
Miss Maddie
Badges: 18
Rep:
?
#23
Report Thread starter 1 month ago
#23
(Original post by CatusStarbright)
London is a poor example, because it is in fact very well connected to other parts of the country. I believe it only takes 2 hours 10 from Leeds and 04 has given other examples. It must also be noted that for flying there is so much more time wasted at the airport, so for a lot of domestic flights while the flight time is a lot quicker, it would be quicker overall to take a train.

As for the idea behind the petition itself, I am inclined in favour as I know that regional operators such as Flybe are important, even key, to links to more isolated parts of the country.
I agree some cities have awful train connections, especially islands without trains altogether. If it's quicker using London it's definitely going to be quicker using less connected cities. The time at the airport beforehand and after adds an hour at most. It still makes London to Newcastle much quicker by plane
0
CatusStarbright
Badges: 22
Rep:
?
#24
Report 1 month ago
#24
(Original post by Miss Maddie)
I agree some cities have awful train connections, especially islands without trains altogether. If it's quicker using London it's definitely going to be quicker using less connected cities. The time at the airport beforehand and after adds an hour at most. It still makes London to Newcastle much quicker by plane
No I meant it's quicker by train for London than to fly.
Actually before you need to allow two hours, and one hour after. Plus there is the travel time to and from the airport.
0
Miss Maddie
Badges: 18
Rep:
?
#25
Report Thread starter 1 month ago
#25
(Original post by CatusStarbright)
No I meant it's quicker by train for London than to fly.
Actually before you need to allow two hours, and one hour after. Plus there is the travel time to and from the airport.
It's not though, London to Newcastle is 3 hours. By plane it's at most 2 (1 actually flying)

Conformance at Heathrow Airport is 35 minutes. Check in online and you're good to go. The whole 2 hours before domestic flights and 3 hours before international flights is a throw back from before everything went online. No one really keeps it. Even easyJet has conformance at T-40 minutes.
0
Saracen's Fez
Badges: 20
Rep:
?
#26
Report 1 month ago
#26
(Original post by Miss Maddie)
TSR for you. Everyone lives in big cities with great public transport. They can't see how remote and out the way places are
And most of the people living in remote, out-of-the-way places also don't live near an airport.

If the intention here is to provide cheaper flights, why would it not lead to a decrease in train usage?
0
Miss Maddie
Badges: 18
Rep:
?
#27
Report Thread starter 1 month ago
#27
(Original post by Saracen's Fez)
And most of the people living in remote, out-of-the-way places also don't live near an airport.

If the intention here is to provide cheaper flights, why would it not lead to a decrease in train usage?
You're right, not everywhere is by an airport. Have you considered all the legs individually to get to those places? E.g. to get from Plymouth to Darlington involves trains to London up north connecting to another train going back down on yourself, followed by bus journeys. If flights were cheaper you could drive to Newquay, catch a potential flight to Teeside and take a bus. Neither place is neither an airport. Travel time is still significantly less. The same would be true for going anywhere in Scotland. South Wales to Scotland, north England and south east would be quicker. North to anywhere would be quicker. The UK has a lot of small airports all over the place. In the 80s and 90s regional air travel was popular. You had a dozen regional airlines. Then APD and tax came along.

There are two parts to it. The first is the existing routes are either cheaper than trains, at parity or at a level where the premium on speed doesn't cost more. In this case there might be a decrease as some people switch over. Second part is the new routes by plane aren't currently served by train and won't be served by direct train because the track isn't in place. On these routes travelling from one place to another becomes more affordable and people will be able to connect who haven't been able to connect before.
0
quirky editor
Badges: 17
Rep:
?
#28
Report 1 month ago
#28
I don't agree with the petition writer's arguments but I support the principle of removing the duty.
0
barnetlad
Badges: 19
Rep:
?
#29
Report 1 month ago
#29
(Original post by Miss Maddie)
I agree some cities have awful train connections, especially islands without trains altogether. If it's quicker using London it's definitely going to be quicker using less connected cities. The time at the airport beforehand and after adds an hour at most. It still makes London to Newcastle much quicker by plane
(Original post by CatusStarbright)
No I meant it's quicker by train for London than to fly.
Actually before you need to allow two hours, and one hour after. Plus there is the travel time to and from the airport.
I agree about the two hours before, one hour after and the travel time.
0
Miss Maddie
Badges: 18
Rep:
?
#30
Report Thread starter 1 month ago
#30
(Original post by barnetlad)
I agree about the two hours before, one hour after and the travel time.
Why do you arrive at the airport so far in advance?
0
barnetlad
Badges: 19
Rep:
?
#31
Report 1 month ago
#31
(Original post by Miss Maddie)
Why do you arrive at the airport so far in advance?
On the few occasions I fly, I have to allow for the possibility of the train/bus or other transport to the airport being late, the queue at the airport to baggage drop, then the passport queue. You may not need this at small airports or those run properly, but you can never say that about any of the London airports, even with baggage drops and also the passport staff being absent at busy times. Then on arrival you have to wait for luggage.

You don't need that length of time for domestic trains, or Eurostar. For my trip to Brussels I was at St Pancras about 45 minutes beforehand, and straight off the Eurostar onto the Brussels Metro within a couple of minutes of arrival.
0
Miss Maddie
Badges: 18
Rep:
?
#32
Report Thread starter 1 month ago
#32
(Original post by barnetlad)
On the few occasions I fly, I have to allow for the possibility of the train/bus or other transport to the airport being late, the queue at the airport to baggage drop, then the passport queue. You may not need this at small airports or those run properly, but you can never say that about any of the London airports, even with baggage drops and also the passport staff being absent at busy times. Then on arrival you have to wait for luggage.

You don't need that length of time for domestic trains, or Eurostar. For my trip to Brussels I was at St Pancras about 45 minutes beforehand, and straight off the Eurostar onto the Brussels Metro within a couple of minutes of arrival.
It sounds like you are applying a holiday experience of flying to commuting by plane or very short trips. The luggage thing doesn't exist with commuters (they don't have hold luggage). Using possible late trains or traffic is also a cop out. You can miss a train to somewhere and trains are not always that frequent in lesser connected areas
0
Jammy Duel
  • Political Ambassador
Badges: 21
Rep:
?
#33
Report 1 month ago
#33
(Original post by Miss Maddie)
It has all this extra time to reduce its debt. It is realistic without APD being ended? I would say no. The APD severely lowers profit margins. Over the next 3 years fuel will go up, airport fees will go up and aircraft maintenance will become more costly as aircraft age. A potential minimum extra £13 per passenger would be hugely beneficial on existing routes, plus it allows other routes to open that would otherwise be too costly for the consumer generating even more cash.
Is it realistic? Quite simply, yes. The cash flow from operating activities would increase almost tenfold, net change in cash and cash equivalents goes from reductions of tens of millions to increases of tens of millions without need for new loans, this in turn means lower interest which improves future cash positions.

Abolition of APD isn't necessary, a reduction by £1.50 would be sufficient to reliably return to making profit, although you're likely looking at double that for increases in cash and cash equivalents based on the 2016/17 and 2017/18 accounts if cash flows from investing activities remains at 2017/18 levels. Increasing the load factor, which is significantly below the industry average would have a far greater impact, this this TTP arrangement leads to that outcome not APD reduction is necessary
0
Jammy Duel
  • Political Ambassador
Badges: 21
Rep:
?
#34
Report 1 month ago
#34
(Original post by barnetlad)
On the few occasions I fly, I have to allow for the possibility of the train/bus or other transport to the airport being late, the queue at the airport to baggage drop, then the passport queue. You may not need this at small airports or those run properly, but you can never say that about any of the London airports, even with baggage drops and also the passport staff being absent at busy times. Then on arrival you have to wait for luggage.

You don't need that length of time for domestic trains, or Eurostar. For my trip to Brussels I was at St Pancras about 45 minutes beforehand, and straight off the Eurostar onto the Brussels Metro within a couple of minutes of arrival.
So how many domestic flights have you been on?

Also you seem to be adhering to the "3 hours for intercontinental, 2 hours for domestic/European flight" which quite artificially increases the time required significantly. You don't queue at the airport for checked luggage if you have none, nor do you wait for it at the other end. Flybe also heavily services small airports, many of which will handle as many people in a year as Heathrow or Gatwick would in a single day

Doing a bit of googling, for Heathrow T5 you must be tat security 35 minutes before your scheduled departure time, with people advising arrival 45 mins before departure for LHR and LGW, but as little as half an hour before at LCY, no more than about half an hour for MAN, your regional airports able to get away with as little as 15 minutes.
0
LiberOfLondon
Badges: 18
Rep:
?
#35
Report 1 month ago
#35
Aye.
0
Miss Maddie
Badges: 18
Rep:
?
#36
Report Thread starter 1 month ago
#36
(Original post by Jammy Duel)
Is it realistic? Quite simply, yes. The cash flow from operating activities would increase almost tenfold, net change in cash and cash equivalents goes from reductions of tens of millions to increases of tens of millions without need for new loans, this in turn means lower interest which improves future cash positions.

Abolition of APD isn't necessary, a reduction by £1.50 would be sufficient to reliably return to making profit, although you're likely looking at double that for increases in cash and cash equivalents based on the 2016/17 and 2017/18 accounts if cash flows from investing activities remains at 2017/18 levels. Increasing the load factor, which is significantly below the industry average would have a far greater impact, this this TTP arrangement leads to that outcome not APD reduction is necessary
I don't consider 4.4% below well below average sector load factor. Assuming it was significantly below, I disagree that providing time to pay improves load factor. The load factor issue is dependent on its routes being too thin at the current price point, aircraft being too large, the costly leases on needless jets and old routes becoming unprofitable against subsidised rail. It's a catch 22, the oversized and costly jets are nowhere near the end of their lease and they find themselves in needs of turboprops. Either take on more debt acquiring turboprops or keep running the jets at a loss
0
Jammy Duel
  • Political Ambassador
Badges: 21
Rep:
?
#37
Report 1 month ago
#37
(Original post by Miss Maddie)
I don't consider 4.4% below well below average sector load factor. Assuming it was significantly below, I disagree that providing time to pay improves load factor. The load factor issue is dependent on its routes being too thin at the current price point, aircraft being too large, the costly leases on needless jets and old routes becoming unprofitable against subsidised rail. It's a catch 22, the oversized and costly jets are nowhere near the end of their lease and they find themselves in needs of turboprops. Either take on more debt acquiring turboprops or keep running the jets at a loss
Allowing the time to pay doesn't increase the load factor directly, it allows time for the load factor to increase before there is significant risk of insolvency, taking on additional debt to pay now just exacerbates the issue of having too much debt.

As for load factor, 6.1% behind whole industry average, 10.5% behind US domestic (although I do concede that's more like short haul international than UK domestic)
0
CatusStarbright
Badges: 22
Rep:
?
#38
Report 1 month ago
#38
(Original post by Miss Maddie)
It's not though, London to Newcastle is 3 hours. By plane it's at most 2 (1 actually flying)

Conformance at Heathrow Airport is 35 minutes. Check in online and you're good to go. The whole 2 hours before domestic flights and 3 hours before international flights is a throw back from before everything went online. No one really keeps it. Even easyJet has conformance at T-40 minutes.
But you still have to get to the airport, drop baggage, go for security etc. I'd rather take the train as the total time would be less.

I've noticed that in smaller airports they are a lot less efficient with this so queues are actually longer at the more regional airports. My favourite airport for speed and ease is actually Heathrow, believe it or not. My least favourite is unfortunately the one here in Lyon - flying home for Christmas (on a Thursday may I add) I waited 20 minutes for bag drop and almost an hour for security, it was ridiculous.
0
04MR17
Badges: 22
Rep:
?
#39
Report 1 month ago
#39
(Original post by Miss Maddie)
People living in these poorer cities can commute for better paying jobs. They have more money. They spend more money in their local area. Their areas become wealthier. The areas become more desirable. More people move in. More money for councils. More people spending. Places get even wealthier. Natural investment happens in wealthier areas. Places catch up to London. London and everywhere else parity even nearer.

It's already happened in places close to where higher paying jobs are. E.g. London and its surrounding towns and cities, Bristol and the south Welsh cites, and Glasgow with Edinburgh.
They can, you have no evidence that they will.
0
Jammy Duel
  • Political Ambassador
Badges: 21
Rep:
?
#40
Report 1 month ago
#40
(Original post by CatusStarbright)
But you still have to get to the airport, drop baggage, go for security etc. I'd rather take the train as the total time would be less.

I've noticed that in smaller airports they are a lot less efficient with this so queues are actually longer at the more regional airports. My favourite airport for speed and ease is actually Heathrow, believe it or not. My least favourite is unfortunately the one here in Lyon - flying home for Christmas (on a Thursday may I add) I waited 20 minutes for bag drop and almost an hour for security, it was ridiculous.
You need to get to the station too, or do you live in a station?

And breaking news: domestic travel doesn't tend to involved checked baggage unless it is part of a larger journey, for instance to get to a major airport to then go international, that means you rock up at the airport and go straight to security, just like if you were using a budget airline for a city break
1
X
new posts
Back
to top
Latest
My Feed

See more of what you like on
The Student Room

You can personalise what you see on TSR. Tell us a little about yourself to get started.

Personalise

People at uni: do initiations (like heavy drinking) put you off joining sports societies?

Yes (479)
66.44%
No (242)
33.56%

Watched Threads

View All
Latest
My Feed