Very Fast Trains a Challenge to Aviation

In Australia the concept of the VFT needs little introduction and could well prove to be one of the most economically profound development programmes this country has ever undertaken and on a par with the Snowy Mountains Scheme and the North West Shelf project as the cost is estimated at $A5bn.

However, what are the implications for air transport?

Many indeed, and they are basically all negative in that the alternative of very fast rail services in many cases offers travellers a significant improvement in service. The reason is simply that the worldwide primary trunk routes are becoming increasingly congested and as any regular air traveller will tell you – getting worse by the day. The problem for the airlines is that planes fly between airports, which in most cases are situated well out from the commercial business districts (CBD) of that city.

Trains on the other hand operate from the centre of a city to the centre of another. Where you disembark is usually within walking distance or a short cab ride to where you need to go. If you are travelling to that city’s suburbs, then the VFT terminus is also usually situated alongside a primary suburban rail terminal. This is why Japan’s Shinkansen are so popular. Imagine flying from Tokyo to Osaka, Nagoya or Kobe when you can use the train in less time, at less expense and in greater comfort with an on time (99%) schedule reliability with no thoughts as to the prevailing weather conditions and the effect that might have on your journey. This latter point is worthy of extra consideration as a reasonable proportion of the population are not natural fliers and might consequently welcome the opportunity not to have to make that hairy approach into an unseen airport in driving rain, gusting winds and approaching thunderstorms.

So, have VFT’s already made inroads into civil aviation? It is difficult to evaluate just how the Japanese system has actually affected inter city air transport as the Shinkansen commenced services in the mid sixties at a time when Japanese domestic aviation was not developed to the same comparatively high standards as it was in either North America or Europe.

In Europe, the most practical example would be France’s excellent TGV (train a grande vitesse, or ‘high-speed train’) which commenced services at 280kph in 1981 between Paris and Lyon. This was in direct competition with Air Inter, admittedly an airline in this writer’s experience that travellers would hurriedly seek an alternative to! The result was that the airline lost almost 80% of its traffic within the first year with this now settling back to around 60% in recent years. Essentially the TGV offers first class service cheaper than the all economy arrangement aboard Air lnter’s maximum density configured jets, whilst providing the added bonus of delivering the traveller to either the heart of Paris or Lyon. TGV trains of a faster design that travel at 300kph now also serve Nantes and Bordeaux with services planned to Geneva, Marseilles and Nice. Other primary European markets destined to receive VFTs in the coming decade include London/ Paris (via the Chunnel), Paris/Amsterdam, Paris/Brussels, London/Amsterdam and possibly London/Frankfurt. As airport congestion is already legendary in Europe, then the attraction of these city to city services is obvious as an alternative to travelling to the airport (usually in heavy traffic), queuing at check in, waiting for the often delayed departure and then flying for a short period only to be placed in the inevitable holding pattern with thousands of fellow travellers.

The airlines are still wary as to specifically how to tackle this marketing problem when it emerges later this decade. The British Airports Authority (equivalent to our FAC) has already become a partner in the Chunnel fast train project while an unnamed UK carrier (not BA) has reportedly evinced a strong interest in buying a number of British Rail’s intercity express routes should they be privatised.

Across the Channel, Air Inter is fighting fire with fire and joining with France’s SNCF (which operates the TGV), British Rail and West Germany’s Bundesbahn to build a high speed commuter link between Orly Airport and Paris, a link that will cut travel time from around thirty five minutes to just ten. SNCF is also building a TGV link direct into Paris’ Charles de Gaulle airport (the city’s primary international airport) that will link in with the expanding TGV system and ultimately offer additional competition for domestic carriers serving these centres. Lufthansa though leads the way in this regard and for several years now has operated its own train linking Dusseldorf f and Frankfurt airports with stops in the city centres of Dusseldorf, Cologne and Bonn.

England has always been synonymous with fast trains by modern standards. British Airways has thus built up a good database of experience against competitive rail. It quotes experience on the London/Manchester route, around a two hour rail trip as being split roughly 50/50 between air and train. A VFT on this route however would nearly halve travel time and thus almost eliminate the requirement for air services owing to the location of airports and the usual delays experienced nowadays at such centres, particularly as Heathrow is often a. . fuli hour out of London’s CBD. On the longer routes such as London/Glasgow, air maintains around 80%. This is a similar distance as London/ Paris where BA will compete against the Chunnel VFT from 1993 onwards. However, for a number of reasons, this train is not really a VFT as its speeds are greatly limited by firstly the tunnel itself and then the environmental sensitivities on the English sector of the journey. BA believes that while it will inevitably lose traffic to the train, the train will also stimulate new traffic that presently does not exist, particularly in the leisure market, something that is ill served by Europe’s primary flag carriers and is still largely the domain of the charter and inclusive tour operators. Airlines thus see their best chance of combating VFT’s as improving ATC systems and airports to eliminate or at least reduce airport and airways congestion and to also radically improve the ground transportation system linking airports with their city centres.

The other European nation actively working towards the VFT is West Germany. That nation is planning to commence VFT services in 1991 with the first of 41 Inter-City Express’ (ICE). These 300kph trains will eat into West Germany’s domestic air transport system and will rapidly begin to serve other destinations following Europe’s open border policies from late 1992. Italy is also flirting with VFTs though its rail system is so debt-burdened (losing $A13bn in 1988) and inefficient that it can only afford to participate in R&D efforts at this stage. However, the Italian railways do operate the Fiat Pendolini which travels at up to 250kph and leans heavily into specially graded corners linking Milan with Rome. This service is also being extended past Rome to Naples with a faster 280kph version that may well also see extensions to Turin and Lyon and from Venice to Munich.

And so to Australia.

Our own Very Fast Train concept was as a result of a CSIRO report into the technical feasibility of operating a 350kph train between Sydney, Canberra and Melbourne. Industry support was forthcoming and a consortium comprising BHP, TNT, Elders IXL and Kumagai Gumi was formed to further evaluate the proposal from both technical and economic viewpoints. Following initial concept studies, a $19m feasibility study was initiated, the results of this in-depth study are due for release later this year. If they are in the affirmative, as it looks as if they will be, then the consortium suggests a five to six year construction phase which would realistically have the line fully operational by around 1997. The easiest to build stage though will be from Canberra to Sydney and this will actually be operating in the test and training role within three years of a go-ahead which is hoped for by this time next year.

The VFT when fully operational will operate up to 40 daily services between Sydney and Melbourne. All will stop at Canberra, from which some will also originate in either direction. While the bulk will be express services, several will be ‘stoppers’ serving the soon-to-boom townships along the route. There is generally little argument that the VFT will be a major asset to these previously dormant communities as massive long-term tourism and business opportunities are opened up as a result of the fast rail link.

Each train will have a capacity of 400 passengers and will run in either a two or three class configuration. First class travellers will have a telephone built into their seat arm rest while fax and work station amenities will also be provided. Accommodation will be to a higher standard in each class compared with that typically provided by the airlines. The service will also operate independent of weather conditions and by operating city centre to city centre is expected to be only about 40 to 50 minutes longer than a typical Sydney/Melbourne jet flight in overall CBD/CBD transit time. Furthermore, as road, airport and airways congestion increases in the years ahead, the time difference with the VFT will only decrease in favour of rail. The services from Canberra to Sydney will be quicker than a jet in real terms and about equivalent for the longer Canberra/Melbourne route.

This is obviously a major potential problem for the airlines as they grapple with ongoing traffic delays at Sydney’s KSA and it highlights TNT’s market foresight as they get aboard both the train and the plane for the ride into the 21st century. Though the third runway will hopefully be operational well before the VFT commences service, the natural growth in air transport, despite events of the last half year, will generally begin to outweigh this extra capacity advantage. Nobody really knows when Badgery’s Creek will commence jet RPT operations, though one thing for certain is that when it finally does, it will be such a long way from Sydney’s CBD that it could well prove to be aviation’s greatest enemy in the longer term in comparison with domestic jet operations at KSA, which is at least close to the city centre.

A perusal of the proposed VFT schedule says it all. A 6. 05am departure from Melbourne actually gets you to Canberra at 8. 13am and to central Sydney by 9. 24am in time for a full working day. The bonus here though is that if you live out towards Dan denong you can pick up the VFT at that station at 6. 24am instead of having to trek into the city. If you live in that highly populated sector of Melbourneyou also do not need to be toldjust how long it takes to typically reach Tullamarine during the morning rush hour. To catch an 8. 00am flight to Sydney can thus have you getting out of bed earlier than for a 6. 24am VFT. The same situation exists in reverse for Sydney residents who can also catch the VFT at its Campbelltown stop.

In extolling that fact we are not trying to degrade aviation but rather to point out the obvious impact that high speed rail will begin to have on all forms of short medium haul aviation in the decades ahead. It is now the challenge for aviation to face this new form of competition head on and improve its game in a number of ways.

From Canberra you can depart for Sydney at a sensible 8. 13am and be at Sydney Central at 9. 24am without having to worry about winter fog grounding your flight. Moreover you can depart Canberra at 8. 00am and be in the hearfof Melbourne at 10. 05. Thus the VFT will be faster to Sydney than the plane in real terms and fairly equivalent for Melbourne while at the same time costing about half the typical airline fare in the process.

However, the VFT won’t be all bad news for the airlines. It will also feed many people directly into KSA where a station will be built (one would have also been·built at Wilton if that site had been selected for Sydney’s second airport instead of the more controversial Badgery’s Creek) while if the non-preferred inland route is taken then a similar station will also run direct into Tullamarine. The 876km coastal route though is the preferred option.

What the VFT will do, however, is to take (on current consortium market projections) around half the available Sydney/ Melbourne air transport market, most of the Canberra to Sydney and Melbourne market and to also affect centres such as Cooma and Albury and Wagga if the inland route is chosen.

On fares, the consortium is looking at something in the region of (1987 values) $105 for Sydney/Melbourne standard economy one way, $35 Sydney/Canberra and $70 Canberra/Melbourne. Equivalent value 1987 economy jet air fares are $170, $90 and $130. In other words, passengers will be able to travel first class for far less than the existing economy class fare base while the leisure market will also be well served by better amenities, just as in the Shinkansen and quicker check in and a more generous baggage allowance. Trains will operate with such regularity that bookings generally won’t be required while capacity available by late in the decade is expected to be up to 16,000 seats per day. Working on a projected load factor of just 60% this equates to 10,000 pax a day or the equivalent of around 110 737-300s at a 70% load factor. This equates to 3. 3m pax a year which is interesting considering that in 1987 3. 3m people flew between Sydney and Melbourne.

Overseas experience quoted by the consortium is also interesting. In both Japan and France, it is now evident that, for fast rail journeys of up to two hours, rail will take most of the air market while for journeys of up to 4. 5 hours the split is 50/50.

The VFT of course has a long way to go. Probably its biggest hurdle is environmental rather than technical. In fact, from a technological viewpoint there is little radical about the concept as the train will be a standard wheel on rail design using existing technology. However, the environment is a different matter and though much of what has already been stated by the environmental lobby is technically questionable, there still remains much to be resolved before the first sod of earth can be turned.

Considering that the entire non urban line will have to be fenced on both sides, then one sensible option the consortium might well consider is planting a barrier of trees alongside this fence to not only absorb noise (which like aircraft on approach is primarily aerodynamic or wind generated noise) but also to aesthetically hide the line itself, while also serving as a wind break to reduce the effects of crosswind gusts, etc. This would see the planting of up to 400,000 trees, something that the environmental lobby would surely find it difficult to object to.

In France and Japan, noise is not really a problem and, as with Stage 3 aircraft, is mostly used as a political whipping horse by those who really don’t know any better. There are still councillors in Sydney’s southern suburbs that would even claim a BAe 146 is noisy yet havenever even heard one. The issue of noise and right of access though will most definitely be the VFT’s single biggest environmental challenges and may prove the most time consuming hurdles to surmount before the project can proceed.

Technology is now giving us a new age of very fast trains. Just as the DC-3 revolutionised the way people began to think about air travel in the mid thirties, and just as the 707 and DC-8 three and a half decades later opened the skies to the long haul leisure traveller, the concept of very fast rail has well and truly arrived. It will not go away and its benefits are considerable.

Air transport will now have to grapple with the implications of its emergence as a competitive form of travel over primary trunk routes of less than 1,000km. As air travel worldwide is tipped to double by the end of the decade, then maybe the advent of fast rail will in effect be a saviour for an already overcrowded airways and airports system .

Readers interested in knowing more about Australia’s VFTand its implications for air transport might like to attend a special two day seminar on the subject to be hosted by the Institution of Engineers in Canberra on March 22 and 23. For additional information phone (06) 270 6555.