Is a flight really quicker than a train? I put it to the test from London to Lyon

Though many of us regularly take trains within our own country, we often don’t think of doing the same when travelling abroad.

We can easily come up with excuses for plane over train: not enough holiday leave from work, planes are cheaper or, even, that we wouldn’t know how to book a long distance train journey. But we wanted to put one excuse to the test: being in a hurry to get to our destination.

We have such an extensive train network across Europe, where you can depart right from the city centre, so maybe flying isn’t always the quickest option?

I decided to find out for myself when I needed to get to Euronews’ headquarters in Lyon from London. In one direction I flew and in the other I took the train. Here’s what I learnt.

I started my journey early on a Sunday morning in east London. The first leg was a taxi to London St. Pancras station where I boarded the train to London Luton Airport.

I have to say this is my least favourite London airport to travel to, purely because the train station isn’t at the airport - you have to take a shuttle bus. If your train arrival coincides with the bus, you’re golden. If not, you could be waiting a while.

Once inside the airport it was a quick process to drop off my baggage and get through security. From leaving my front door to being through into the departures lounge, it took two hours in total.

Unfortunately, as is common with flights and particularly with budget airlines, my flight was delayed by an hour. This was particularly annoying as I had just bought a quick to-go breakfast as I didn’t think I had time for a sit down meal.

An hour later, and over four hours after I had left the house, I was finally at my gate. It was a pretty full flight so it then took further time to board.

Fi