On Planes and Trains
A recent news clip on AviationWeek.com noted that KLM-Air France is in preliminary talks with French transportation company Veolia about a potential rail partnership.
What’s this about air and rail transit companies getting cozy with each other? They don’t usually share resources; they compete against each other, on short-haul trips at least. Ah, but trains and planes share one thing in common: they move people and goods. This potential partnership may be a case of “if you can’t beat ’em, join ’em” mentality, which makes sense in a lot of ways, financially.
In some areas, particularly Europe and the northeastern U.S., high speed rail is providing stiff competition for airlines, especially for transporting people on short-haul routes. When you factor in the time necessary to get to and from an airport and pass through the security checks, it is often faster—or just as fast—to go via high speed rail, if your destination is a short distance away (for example, Paris to Frankfurt). Furthermore, it costs about the same amount of money for the ticket holder/user, and the train stations are usually located in convenient downtown urban locations, near businesses and other transit infrastructure. Veolia does not yet use high speed rail, but that could change, since the infrastructure is in place throughout much of Europe, and in some parts of the United States. (It’s worth noting that Veolia, though headquartered in France, is the largest transportation (bus and rail) provider in the US, and operates services on behalf of over 5,000 local, regional and national authorities around the globe.)
Rising fuel costs are no doubt a factor that is prompting Air France-KLM’s conversations with Veolia; certainly both industries face the challenge of rising fuel costs, but it probably takes less fuel to get a train from point A to point B. One must also consider how much weight/volume (people and cargo) can be hauled for the same amount of fuel.
But which mode of transport costs less to maintain? Is the cost of rail maintenance lower than aircraft maintenance? That’s hard to calculate, given the variety of differences between the two transportation modes. In general, jet aircraft machinery is more complex than that of trains, so it’s fair to assume that maintenance costs are much higher for airlines. However, rail transit must spend a substantial amount of money to maintain thousands of miles of track and hundreds of stations.
Enigma already has a strong track record (pun intended) for reducing costs and improving efficiency in aviation maintenance by providing parts and service information. Because most people and some cargo must reach far-off destinations quickly, there will always be a need for airline transport. But we fully expect to see growth in the rail industry, and along with it a growing demand for products such as Enigma 3C, InService MRO and InService EPC, which are currently implemented in rail transit companies to help them achieve similar benefits in their maintenance depots.
Rail travel seems to be making a bit of a comeback; according to the American Public Transportation Association, in the first quarter of 2008 there was a 3.42% increase over the same quarter last year in unlinked transit passenger trips (which includes light rail, heavy rail, buses and trolleys). Furthermore, CNN just reported today that U.S. cities are racing to cope with ever-increasing demand on public transportation as gas prices remain at record levels.
Several airlines probably sense a need to diversify to capitalize on this trend. After all, both airlines and rail are in the business of transporting people and cargo from one location to another. Therefore, it seems logical for the two industries to become closer. Don’t be surprised if you soon hear more airlines calling “ALL ABOARD!”
Tags: light rail, rail maintenance, rail transit
