@taxguru
With air travel, the only "infrastructure" as such are the airports and air traffic control. Once the plane is in the air, it's in the air, and doesn't need anything "on the ground". And there is only maybe a dozen or airports in the country compared with 2,500 stations on the railways (excluding underground!) and around 500 signal boxes controlling it.
It’s not a straightforward or as simple as that. There’s a lot of complex stuff that goes on behind behind the scenes in aviation that has to be paid for that most of the public aren’t aware of. For example every single flight, every single day needs a load and balance calculation run, a bespoke fuel plan calculated and best route decided upon and then planned…that all costs in personnel and IT costs…There’s a lot of other parallel stuff (e.g. the physical loading) that also needs paying for before the aircraft even moves.
Get airborne and you definitely do need lots of something “on the ground” and that costs. Fly along and you get handed off at regular intervals from one control center to another (so a bit like signal boxes) so the airlines have to pay navigation charges to fund all the ATC datalink, radars, communications systems and of course controllers needed en-route.
There’s lot lot more as well but to cut to the chase and the bottom line is it typically reckoned to cost at least 10,000 USD an hour to operate something 737/A320 sized.
Now people are right in saying one advantage is airlines can get costs down by flying multiple sectors a day per aircraft (short haul) but I suspect there is more to it than that.
I’m not in the UK and I have to agree with some pps that looked at from overseas UK train fares look eyewatering, and maybe that’s the bigger mystery.
I’ve just booked a long distance (>400 km) domestic inter city trip for this summer, and there was no significant difference between the air fare and the train fare..I’m taking the train.