New blog posts will be posted there.

James

The service costs €10 per person per flight sector. Other passengers can still pay €5 for priority boarding.

Does this make you any more likely to fly with Ryanair?

But what about when you want flights to that hub itself? You would have thought that there would be enough capacity on the route for it to be cheaper to go direct with the airline which operates that hub facility. As it happens, the opposite is often the case, even when flights via that hub are cheaper than direct flights to the other hub.

Looking at flights to 10 hub airports served by direct and connecting flights from Birmingham, we found the following:

Flight prices were searched using Expedia.co.uk for a 1 week trip (therefore including a Saturday night stay and often being cheaper), between 1st and 8th December. Only flights to Paris and Amsterdam were cheaper direct – hardly surprising considering how close they are, but Brussels still worked out more expensive to go direct.

Now these dates might be quite soon, but they are still before the mid-December Christmas rush. Looking forward to March next year, prices for direct flights to Brussels, Frankfurt, Munich and Zurich fell below the prices for flight connections.

This shows that the network carriers are still charging hefty premiums for direct flights. This seems to fly in the face of environmental concerns over short haul flights being the most polluting – and two short haul flights when one will often do being particularly bad for the environment.

The low cost airlines have shown that point to point routes are what the customers want, and that they shouldn’t need to pay for the privilege. Most low cost airlines actively shun transfer passengers, as if one flight is late, they don’t want to deal with missed connections, and their smallprint makes it clear that they are your problem, not theirs.

Yet, of the routes featured, none have a low cost alternative from Birmingham. At a push, you could fly to Paris with Flybe, and then take Thalys to Brussels, or if your dates were flexible, you could find a cheap flight to Geneva and then train it to Zurich.

So will the legacy airlines ever wake up to the idea that direct flights should be cheaper for them to operate, better for the environment, and therefore cheaper for the consumer? Not without a heft taxation penalty against them, and UK Air Passenger Duty is onerous enough as it is. In the meantime, they will continue to charge more for the convenience of a direct service, especially if there isn’t a realistic low cost alternative.

Notes:

• *Continental dates were 2nd-9th December. No direct Continental flights found in March 2012.
• AF = Air France, DL = Delta
• AMS = Amsterdam, CDG = Paris CDG, ZRH = Zurich

We’ve added two separate columns for the core information. We will shortly be adapting all pages over to a new template, and this will include a further detailed breakdown of public transport information, such as timings and sample fares. For now, we include the actual distance (shortest road journey) from the city centre to the airport, and an icon for the best form of public transport available. Even if some airports served by high speed trains might have much faster access to the city centre than those which only have a bus link, the actual distance is still important, as it will determine the likely fares for getting to the city centre, whether by public transport or taxi.

Distances:

To view sample distances (for cities with 2+ airports), please visit our countries page, and select any major city with multiple airports – these are most common in the USA, Germany and Italy.

Public Transport

To view sample distances (for cities with 2+ airports), please visit our countries page.

Public Transport

Icon	Title	Description
	No transit	No form of scheduled transport is available from airport. Use hire car, taxi or resort transfer service.
	Bus link	Bus available to city centre (onward connections may be available at central station, other buses may be available).
	Bus to rail	Bus links to nearby station, other buses may also be available direct to centre.
	Walk to rail	Rail station nearby – may not be ‘official’ airport station. Buses also available.
	Station on site	Rail (or metro / tram) station onsite, providing link to centre. Buses also usually available.
	Rail hub	Airport has rail interchange – direct train services to other key cities as well as centre.
	Boat service	Boat link to city. Other transport may be available, but scenic boat ride always trumps train!
	Walk it	Airport is within walking distance of city centre. Bus also usually available.
	Rail alternative	Station offers alternative direct high speed rail service to flights from UK.

We also have plenty of information about the standards of public transport in most of the cities we feature on our site. This will evolve into our sister site, @carornocar, which looks at the pros and cons of renting a car versus public transport in numerous cities around the world.

As always, comments and feedback are most welcome.

JA

Sometimes they will make a big song and dance about it (e.g. Memmingen for Munich), even when the alternative is ambitious at best. Yet sometimes, the opposite can be the case – Ryanair may not actively promote a destination as being an alternative, but passengers might still use it, especially if the main city airport is congested or expensive to fly into.

So, is Turku a realistic ‘Helsinki West’?

In many ways, even if it is, this is only in supplement to Ryanair’s long established flights to Tampere – with both cities being just under a 2 hours drive away from Helsinki. Although the train journey from Turku to Helsinki is also around 2 hours, the journey from Tampere is a faster run – taking just 90 minutes.

Despite these short distances, there are actually operational flight routes between Helsinki and both Turku and Tampere, operated by Flybe Nordic on behalf of Finnair. So this would be a rare case of a Ryanair alternative city actually being so far away from the other city that you can actually fly over the distance. Yet, on the face of it, these extremely short internal flights seem utterly pointless – a bit like Flybe operating flights from Birmingham to Gatwick, and exactly the sort of thing that would get Friends of the Earth hopping mad.

So is there really a big cost saving by taking ‘cheap’ flights to Tampere or Turku instead? Going on base prices, Ryanair offer little saving over fierce Nordic rivals Fly Norwegian, especially as the latter does not charge for hidden extras like debit car payments. Unfortunately, the market for budget flights to Helsinki is not as competitive as it has been, now that easyJet no longer offer any flights to Finland, and Blue1 just offer flights to Helsinki from Edinburgh.

Helsinki Airport lags behind its Scandinavian rivals in that Oslo, Copenhagen and Stockholm airports all have fast and direct rail links to their respective city centres. Yet, even on the slow bus, it is still far easier to get to the centre of Helsinki from Helsinki airport than from the other two.

In fact, the question should really be the other way round – to what extent is Helsinki airport still the best option for reaching Turku, Tampere and other cities in southern Finland which have airports? In the case of Tampere, you can even take a short (10-15 minute) bus or taxi ride to nearby Tikkurila station, from where the train to Tampere takes just 75 minutes.

As with any destination, it is always worth mixing and matching in and outbound flights, so you can see both cities for not much more (and sometimes even less) than the price of visiting one. Considering that Helsinki Vantaa Airport is a delightful icon of Finnish design, we would suggest flying into Turku or Tampere and out of Helsinki.

This is still another niche destination that Ryanair have added to their list – complementing their existing flights to Tampere, to the north east. Both of these destinations could be considered as alternative gateways to Helisnki, although I would strongly advise checking out the best fares for direct flights to Helsinki first.

But the real beauty of Finland, especially when you fly to destinations outside the capital, must surely lie in its wonderful and never-ending array of scenic coastline and inland lakes? This is certainly a great part of Europe to drive around, but to appreciate it at its best, you really need to take to the water.

Turku is gateway port for numerous islands just off the shore, but also for more ‘serious’ ferries to the enclave of Mariehamn, and even on to Stockholm. I have personally taken the overnight ferry from Stockholm to Helsinki as part of a Nordic ‘surface trip’ (I can’t call it a road trip, as most of it was by rail or ferry). These superferries really are like floating villages – but unlike cruise liners, you feel like you are actually going somewhere to.

With the various different low cost airlines serving southern Finland and the Stockholm area, it is easy to fly outbound to one, and back from the other – and there is certainly no reason to assume that just because Ryanair go there, they are your best or only option.

• Who offers flights to Stockholm (all airports) from the UK / Ireland?
• Who offers flights to Finland from the UK / Ireland?

I don’t want to flippantly dismiss serious concerns about energy supply (not my core topic of ranting), but I am frequently reminded of the farce that governs congestion on roads in the UK, and elsewhere in the world. Whilst the airline industry, and to a lesser extent the rail industry (European railway networks are slowly catching up) has long since adapted to the notion that the price of tickets is a commodity which rises and falls with demand, except in limited cases (bridges, M6 Toll, London Congestion Charge), there is no such mechanism to govern usage of our roads.

Now, of course, there would be no point in altering the cost of petrol at the pumps – people would just buy when the station is quiet and use later – so the answer must lie in some form of road pricing. This was understandably dismissed previously, as public distrust of the last government meant that it was seen as just another stealth tax.

No we have a new transport minister, is it time to look again at a demand-led road pricing system, offset by a reduction in the price of petrol?

This would at least mean that the cost of driving would be lower during off-peak hours, and there would be a dis-incentive against driving during peak hours, when congestion makes fuel consumption higher.

Every little helps.

Now let’s make this clear – this is not an attempt to compare cost per mile or anything related to the fare itself. It is a simple expression of complete frustration at the total confusion caused by the booking system of a network I know and love.

I have visited Swizterland many times, and have always travelled by train, usually taking advantage of one of the four day Swiss travel passes to continue across the country. In Switzerland, the rail network is a natural extension of the flight, as the two main airports of Geneva and Zurich are not just connected to their respective city centres, but also to a huge selection of destinations beyond.

The fact that the Swiss travel network is so well integrated needs little introduction – the trains are really just the start, with onward links provided by bus, ship and even cable car, although these often require a supplement, as do many of the scenic mountain lines.

So what have they done now to incur my wrath? I am trying to do a simple comparison of some onward journeys by rail, just looking at connections between major cities like Geneva and Zurich. I said last week that trying to get public transport information from UK public transport website Transport Direct was like having teeth extracted. Trying to book a train with Swiss Railways is like having your face smashed in, and then going to the dentist for repair work.

Here’s my list of gripes:

• Try booking a ‘supersaver’ ticket – firstly, you can only do so upto 15 days in advance, not much good for someone planning a holiday. Surely these fares are supposed to encourage early booking?
• No way of finding the best fare, just trawl through different times and see what comes up.
• Double up! Clicking through to the supersaver price includes the standard price in the basket – e.g. Basel to Bern discounted CHF 15.20 (approx. £10) + Standard CHF 38.00, gives a total of CHF 52.40 – why would anyone buy two tickets for the same train?
• ‘Almost free of charge’ supersaver tickets – sounds like Ryanair again, but we’re initially only offered sample prices to Lucerne. Eventually a sample price from Geneva to Zurich is offered at CHF 28 – with the best price found being nearly twice that.
• Zurich and Basel confusion – now I know enough German to understand that HB stands for Hauptbahnhof or Grand Central, but most users would not. I also understand that the SBB in ‘Basel SBB’ stands for Swiss Railways, as opposed to the side of the station that serves France. Again, I would not expect most users to understand this geographical quirk, unless they had been there. We are also lazy, so we type ‘Zurich’, not ‘Zürich’ or Zuerich – after all, the menu does at least start in English.
  
• Enter name and date of birth. Why on earth should I give these details just to get a price quote? And again, the British way of writing dates is with forward slashes, not dots – not that we should dictate this to our European cousins, but an intelligent system should either not ask in the first place, offer a drop down, or understand both.
• No indication of train type (minor gripe). This is more of a geeky personal preference, but some of the mainline services, for example between Zurich and Milan, feature some impressive mountainous sections, which are much more enjoyable when onboard a tilting train. The only was of knowing which trains are tilting is to see if bikes are not conveyed – as the ETR 470 sets don’t take them.
• Other fees? I haven’t even got to whether or not there is a credit card fee, service charge or booking fee, as most users would be long gone by now.

Note: Isn’t this all a bit Anglo-centric? After all, Switzerland has 4 official languages, none of which is English?

A Swiss visitor to the UK could indeed quite rightly complain that Virgin Trains or any other operating company don’t offer them the opportunity to book in German or French – and as for Italian or Romansh!

Yet, like it or not, English is the language of international travel. Of course, speaking the local lingo in any destination is always a big bonus, but it helps to have a website which helps you get there in the first place.

In that respect, I’m afraid SBB.ch is a total fail.

Now I’m not just talking about Vaduz or Andorra-la-Vella, which don’t even have airports, these are major European capital cities, including the capital of the largest country in the EU (Germany), aswell as other major players such as the Spanish capital Madrid and the Polish capital Warsaw. Even Lisbon and Rome will not get Birmingham flights until the end of March 2012.

European capitals not served by flights from Birmingham

(but these are served by flights from Manchester or other UK regional airports):

City	Birmingham	Manchester	Edinburgh	Notes
Athens				(previously operated by various airlines)
Berlin				(previously operated by BACON)
Helsinki
Lisbon	(YES)			(new route starts 31 March 2012)
Moscow
Oslo				(previously by Ryanair to TRF?)
Rome	(YES)			(new route starts 25 March 2012)
Stockholm				(previously by Ryanair to NYO?)
Vienna
Warsaw				(previously operated by Norwegian)

Now, surely I’m not being fair on Birmingham here? Aren’t there many other European capitals and major cities which are served by flights from Birmingham?

European Capital* Cities which are served by Birmingham flights:

City	Birmingham	Manchester	Edinburgh
Amsterdam*
Brussels
Copenhagen
Dublin
Istanbul*
Paris
Prague
Zurich*

In virtually all of the above cases, other the cities served from Birmingham are also served from Edinburgh. European cities which are served by Birmingham flights, but not by flights from Manchester, are few and far between.

If there is any unfairness, it is that there are numerous cities in Germany which are both more commercially important than Berlin, and which are served from Birmingham. Yet, Berlin is still important in its own right, both for business, and as a key city break destination. If there are flights to Berlin from several other UK airports, then why not from Birmingham, especially as the new Brandenburg Airport should create an opportunity for new routes.

Surely, it would be easier to create incentives for the airlines already at Birmingham to open up new routes to some of these key cities, rather than chasing much harder to win contracts for flights to Asia, which have so far failed to materialise in any great way from Manchester, and which would be even less likely to work from Birmingham, given its proxmimity to London. And why should anyone fork out a hefty High Speed 2 rail fare to arrive in some field right on the edge of the Birmingham Airport complex, when Virgin Trains will take them to within a two minute shuttle ride of the main terminal building, with an only marginally longer journey time?

Notes:

• * Amsterdam is nominal capital and most important commercial city in the Netherlands. Seat of government is in The Hague.
• Zurich is both commercial capital of Switzerland and main gateway airport to Bern.
• Istanbul is largest commercial city in Turkey.

Yet a car is ideal for exploring the huge range of places that can be reached beyond New York itself, so here’s a simple way to save upto 36% on New York car hire.

The advice is simple – just land in the right place! So many people put a huge amount of effort into squeezing every last penny off their flights that they don’t think about the additional costs at each end of the journey. For a long time, we have warned against the costs of flying into Newark Airport and taking a taxi into Manhattan – this will set you back around $100 including tips and tolls, compared to $60 from JFK – but the journey back to Newark will cost an extra $15 surcharge on top. This relates to the fact that Newark Airport is in the state of New Jersey, and New York taxis cannot pick up passengers there and vice-versa, so you are paying an out-of-state surcharge, and you pay the tolls in both directions (although the Holland Tunnel is only chargeable heading in to Manhattan).

When it comes to New York airport car hire, the advice is the same, except in reverse – this time, it is much cheaper to pick up your car at Newark. Again, local taxes play their part here, and these vary from state to state.

So, I looked at a week’s Newark Airport car hire in March, and this came out at £167 for JFK or just £114 for Newark – a saving of 32%. Look forward to November 2012 and the JFK rate ramps up to £197, putting it amongst the world’s most expensive car hire locations. Meanwhile, for the same period, Newark Airport car hire comes in at £145, a massive 36% cheaper.

This was for the cheapest car available, so the savings will be greater for family cars. However, the more people there in the the group, the more difference small savings in airfares will make. If you are taking New York flights from London, you can select the best fare / car hire combination to either airport.

If you live near airports such as Birmingham or Manchester, there can be an instinctive urge to look for flights from London, when local flights are available without the hassle and cost of getting to Heathrow. Many UK regional airports offer direct flights to Newark with United Continental, but sometimes indirect flights to JFK via another European hub can be cheaper. Beware that if you are adding on a hire car, this could be a false economy.

Check New York Airport car hire with Car Rentals .co.uk