Airline fares - a model to learn from, a lesson to avoid, or both?

[whole diary]

[grahame]

From the BBC^» (British Broadcasting Corporation - home page) - Jetblue starts services from London to New York. Noting fare comments in the article, I am reminded of some of the practices which I have seen now or in the past on flight fares, and wonder, grumble as we do, if there are some things right as well as some things wrong with the rail fare system:
* Extreme Peaks
* Returns cheaper than singles
* Astronomic walk up costs
* Saturday night stays for lower return fares
* Regional expense - higher price for regional conveniece
* Routing for cheapness - much cheaper with an obscure change
* Tickets not interchangable between services on the same route

[broadgage]

Airlines have long been known for complex fares, railways SHOULD be simpler, but seem to be becoming at least as complex as airlines.
I support a much simplified rail fares system.
Providing extra rail capacity IS expensive, and those who choose to travel at peak times should expect to contribute to these costs via higher fares.
Those who travel off peak are making use of already existing capacity, and the fares should reflect only RUNNING costs, not the capital costs of more or longer trains and extra infrastructure.