Warning: this is not going to be interesting for anyone but people interested in trains underground. There's one more thing about the Tube I wanted to comment on, this time specifically about Northern Line.
In this funny video https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=P4e-Al90tSs Central says that Northern is 'literally two different people'. And that is actually true.
When they made Northern, they merged two lines. One of them had narrower tunnels than the other one, so had to be widened when the lines were merged.
Now, we are left with a line which starts at Morden (southern-most Tube terminus), splits at Kennington to go via Charing Cross or via Bank, and then both rejoins and diverges at Camden Town, to go to Edgware or High Barnet (or sometimes to Mill Hill East).
And guess what. As probably each and every line in the world which splits, Northern is a huge pain in the ass for TfL.
I've heard stories about Line 13 in Paris - the light blue line which splits in a station called La Fourche (Fork) and goes to two different difficult suburbs, Clichy and St Denis. Well this direction (from the city centre to Clichy / St Denic) is not the main problem. The other one is. It's because the trains are supposed to meet at La Fourche and go alternately, one arrives from Clichy and goes to the city centre, then one from St Denis, then one from Clichy, etc. etc.
The problem is that it's not this smooth. Both suburbs are densely populated and not exactly rich. So problems happen. Every day. And trains get delayed as a result. Meaning that every time one half of the line gets stuck, the other one also gets stuck, because they are supposed to wait for the other train.
Same story apparently goes with Northern. But Northern is even more funny because it has Kennington and it has Camden Town, so there are two stations where the trains part. In Camden Town, if you want to change for a train going to the other branch than the train you are in, it's not that easy, you have to walk somewhere etc.
So what TfL did is that most of the trains go from Morden to alternate termini via the Bank branch. There are only few trains per hour to the Charing X branch.
Also, there apparently were plans to split Northern into two lines. But that would require rebuilding Camden Town, and for many reasons, this is not feasible.
The fun continues.
Saturday, 27 January 2018
Speaking of Tube...:
Yesterday, when I arrived from Munich, and tried to travel from Gatwick to London, I had two mysterious experiences.
First. There were no trains to London Bridge any more, so I had to take a train to London Victoria. What happened was that we were stuck for about 13 minutes at Battersea Park (where the train was not even supposed to stop!). Reason? Our train was a 12 coach train, and they did not have any sufficiently long platform free for us at Victoria.
Like, seriously? The train was perfectly on time, and it's not that it's a random train which only runs once a year! It's every day the same thing, so how come they were surprised to the extent of having no platform ready for us? O_o
Second. From Victoria, I had to take Tube. Victoria Line to be precise. Those who read my stuff regularly know about my funny stories from Piccadilly and Central of a Friday night. Well, maybe it was because it was approx an hour earlier, but Victoria was not like that yesterday. The people were much less drunk and much more interesting than in Piccadlly / Central. They were apparently subculture people, few goths, some skinheads (not Nazi skinheads, ska skinheads), many hippies in colourful shirts, etc.
(I travelled from Victoria, southbound, if that's of any relevance.)
Yesterday, when I arrived from Munich, and tried to travel from Gatwick to London, I had two mysterious experiences.
First. There were no trains to London Bridge any more, so I had to take a train to London Victoria. What happened was that we were stuck for about 13 minutes at Battersea Park (where the train was not even supposed to stop!). Reason? Our train was a 12 coach train, and they did not have any sufficiently long platform free for us at Victoria.
Like, seriously? The train was perfectly on time, and it's not that it's a random train which only runs once a year! It's every day the same thing, so how come they were surprised to the extent of having no platform ready for us? O_o
Second. From Victoria, I had to take Tube. Victoria Line to be precise. Those who read my stuff regularly know about my funny stories from Piccadilly and Central of a Friday night. Well, maybe it was because it was approx an hour earlier, but Victoria was not like that yesterday. The people were much less drunk and much more interesting than in Piccadlly / Central. They were apparently subculture people, few goths, some skinheads (not Nazi skinheads, ska skinheads), many hippies in colourful shirts, etc.
(I travelled from Victoria, southbound, if that's of any relevance.)
So, there are few things I wanted to say about the Tube.
Last Sunday, we paid a visit to disused parts of Euston Station. The visit itself was shorter than I would have liked, but the accompanying info was very interesting.
I have a theory which basically says that the metro / Tube / underground / subway is a true reflection of the life in a city. It is a condensed reality if you will, a mirror of social stratification, and so on, and so on. So I made a conclusion. But to explain, I have to first explain a bit about another city with an underground transport system of comparable complexity: Paris.
I have been to Paris few times, and I quite liked the Paris Métro. It was a bit like love at the first sight. I admire the system, I like the aesthetics of the stations, I like the concept - that it's quite obvious that the system is well planned, that someone was thinking when designing the lines.
Afaik in Paris, there are four abandoned stations, and one was shifted few hundred meters away and joined with another station. Another two or three were just shifted, and two or three were repurposed as training stations or depots. There are also two stations that never opened, and two stations which have not even been properly built.
Then you see the original planning: there are lines in all expected directions. One goes north-west to south-east, two go around (one making a northern arch, one making a southern arch), one goes north-east to south-west, and so on. All screams 'planning'. All tells you 'this is what we wanted'. 'We made this on purpose.'
Last Sunday, I discovered the consequences of the fact that in London, the careful planning just didn't happen. What happened was quite the opposite: the Tube lines were dug apparently randomly (in fact it was a wild competition and no regulation thing). Result: about 60 abandoned stations, including at least one whole line - which is still there, with tunnels and everything, it's just not used. During history, stations in London appeared and disappeared, track was installed, moved and removed, lines were shifted, blended, renamed and cancelled, all seemingly randomly.
Do you see careful diagonal, circular, north-to-south etc. lines in London? Do you see planning which would allow you to close down only few stations, do you see someone actually thinking and trying to create something big, a functional system?
Nope.
In London, things just happen randomly, without planning. There's nothing which would make the system anything else than a random network of random stations and lines, with poor / funny connections, with stations appearing and disappearing, with no easy, reliable and intelligent way of getting from one place to another.
We got chaos instead. Bakerloo was much longer but for some reason was split into two, and part of it became Overground. East London line, of few stations, became Overground as well (Overground which runs underground on substantial part of its length). Northern started as three different lines. Some lines were built with smaller (narrower) tunnels which had to be later widened, or have to use small trains. Jubilee Line started as Fleet Line, and was later renamed (and the grey was made lighter) - which allegedly cost millions of pounds. Entire line was almost built and later abandoned. And so on, and so on.
So, my conclusion. The national stereotype may say that the French are disorganized and messy, while the British are accurate and organized. This is bollocks. Just look at Métro and compare it to the Tube.
-------------
Side notes:
If anyone is interested in Paris Métro:
- The four abandoned stations are Croix Rouge, St Martin, Champs de Mars and Arsenal. They are still there, underground, faded but existing.
- The shifted station is Martin Nadaud, which is now 'blended into' Gambetta. Gambetta has exceptionally long platform for this reason. :)
- The unopened stations (which have no access other than track, no stairs or exit) are Porte de Molitor and Haxo.
- The not even built stations are La Défense - Michelet and Élysées La Défense. These two were originally planned, then a concrete box was put underground, and then the cost proved so high that the plans were abandoned, and instead of these, we got the RER A stations.
- For more info, start here: https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Ghost_stations_of_the_Paris_M%C3%A9tro
This site is awesome: http://www.abandonedstations.org.uk/
This is also good: http://carto.metro.free.fr/cartes/metro-london/
(Next time I travel by Piccadilly Line I will be looking for York Road. (I always wondered why the travel time between King's X and Caledonian Road is twice as long as between any other two stations. Now I know.) Next time I travel Northern, I will be looking for City Road. And so on.)
Last Sunday, we paid a visit to disused parts of Euston Station. The visit itself was shorter than I would have liked, but the accompanying info was very interesting.
I have a theory which basically says that the metro / Tube / underground / subway is a true reflection of the life in a city. It is a condensed reality if you will, a mirror of social stratification, and so on, and so on. So I made a conclusion. But to explain, I have to first explain a bit about another city with an underground transport system of comparable complexity: Paris.
I have been to Paris few times, and I quite liked the Paris Métro. It was a bit like love at the first sight. I admire the system, I like the aesthetics of the stations, I like the concept - that it's quite obvious that the system is well planned, that someone was thinking when designing the lines.
Afaik in Paris, there are four abandoned stations, and one was shifted few hundred meters away and joined with another station. Another two or three were just shifted, and two or three were repurposed as training stations or depots. There are also two stations that never opened, and two stations which have not even been properly built.
Then you see the original planning: there are lines in all expected directions. One goes north-west to south-east, two go around (one making a northern arch, one making a southern arch), one goes north-east to south-west, and so on. All screams 'planning'. All tells you 'this is what we wanted'. 'We made this on purpose.'
Last Sunday, I discovered the consequences of the fact that in London, the careful planning just didn't happen. What happened was quite the opposite: the Tube lines were dug apparently randomly (in fact it was a wild competition and no regulation thing). Result: about 60 abandoned stations, including at least one whole line - which is still there, with tunnels and everything, it's just not used. During history, stations in London appeared and disappeared, track was installed, moved and removed, lines were shifted, blended, renamed and cancelled, all seemingly randomly.
Do you see careful diagonal, circular, north-to-south etc. lines in London? Do you see planning which would allow you to close down only few stations, do you see someone actually thinking and trying to create something big, a functional system?
Nope.
In London, things just happen randomly, without planning. There's nothing which would make the system anything else than a random network of random stations and lines, with poor / funny connections, with stations appearing and disappearing, with no easy, reliable and intelligent way of getting from one place to another.
We got chaos instead. Bakerloo was much longer but for some reason was split into two, and part of it became Overground. East London line, of few stations, became Overground as well (Overground which runs underground on substantial part of its length). Northern started as three different lines. Some lines were built with smaller (narrower) tunnels which had to be later widened, or have to use small trains. Jubilee Line started as Fleet Line, and was later renamed (and the grey was made lighter) - which allegedly cost millions of pounds. Entire line was almost built and later abandoned. And so on, and so on.
So, my conclusion. The national stereotype may say that the French are disorganized and messy, while the British are accurate and organized. This is bollocks. Just look at Métro and compare it to the Tube.
-------------
Side notes:
If anyone is interested in Paris Métro:
- The four abandoned stations are Croix Rouge, St Martin, Champs de Mars and Arsenal. They are still there, underground, faded but existing.
- The shifted station is Martin Nadaud, which is now 'blended into' Gambetta. Gambetta has exceptionally long platform for this reason. :)
- The unopened stations (which have no access other than track, no stairs or exit) are Porte de Molitor and Haxo.
- The not even built stations are La Défense - Michelet and Élysées La Défense. These two were originally planned, then a concrete box was put underground, and then the cost proved so high that the plans were abandoned, and instead of these, we got the RER A stations.
- For more info, start here: https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Ghost_stations_of_the_Paris_M%C3%A9tro
This site is awesome: http://www.abandonedstations.org.uk/
This is also good: http://carto.metro.free.fr/cartes/metro-london/
(Next time I travel by Piccadilly Line I will be looking for York Road. (I always wondered why the travel time between King's X and Caledonian Road is twice as long as between any other two stations. Now I know.) Next time I travel Northern, I will be looking for City Road. And so on.)
Monday, 22 January 2018
Once again I find myself in Munich. It has become sort of my favourite city - every time I am here, I am here for nice / interesting / exciting things, so I just kinda like the city. :)
Anyway. They have snow here. Not a lot, but it's there. Exciting.
So, there are two things I've observed about Munich, and Europe in general.
1. It's not cold and damp in houses and flats (and hotel rooms). It's actually nice, warm and cosy in houses and flats (and hotel rooms).
We have boiler in our flat in London. We also have this Dyson oval thing which warms the air in the room. We have blankets and hot beverages. (We don't have candles because fire alarm but you get the idea.) But still our flat just does not feel quite right, quite as warm and DRY as it should.
2. The cold outside is colder (temperature-wise) but actually feels not that cold (feeling-cold-wise). I think it has to do with the humidity. In Manchester, I was freezing when it was below 5 degrees Celsius. It didn't have to be below zero or anything like that to feel totally, totally cold. Same thing in London! I even got myself the thickest Superdry Real Down coat, just to keep warm.
Here, it can be well below zero, and I am just not feeling that cold. It may be 10 degrees less than in London, and I am actually feeling too hot in my super thick coat.
Strange.
Anyway. They have snow here. Not a lot, but it's there. Exciting.
So, there are two things I've observed about Munich, and Europe in general.
1. It's not cold and damp in houses and flats (and hotel rooms). It's actually nice, warm and cosy in houses and flats (and hotel rooms).
We have boiler in our flat in London. We also have this Dyson oval thing which warms the air in the room. We have blankets and hot beverages. (We don't have candles because fire alarm but you get the idea.) But still our flat just does not feel quite right, quite as warm and DRY as it should.
2. The cold outside is colder (temperature-wise) but actually feels not that cold (feeling-cold-wise). I think it has to do with the humidity. In Manchester, I was freezing when it was below 5 degrees Celsius. It didn't have to be below zero or anything like that to feel totally, totally cold. Same thing in London! I even got myself the thickest Superdry Real Down coat, just to keep warm.
Here, it can be well below zero, and I am just not feeling that cold. It may be 10 degrees less than in London, and I am actually feeling too hot in my super thick coat.
Strange.
Friday, 29 December 2017
Notes on London Airports! I have now tried all of them (some of them admittedly only outbound) so I feel that I have stuff to say. There we go.
Heathrow
How big: One of the biggest in the world.
Amount of silly walking around: Moderate. Actually good when you consider the size of this airport. The only exception is getting to/from train or the Tube. That is a proper hike.
Transport to/from the airport: Airport of extremes. Heathrow Express (15 min) or Piccadilly Line (60 min). Heathrow Express is awesome but actually only goes to Paddington (so you have to do another 45 min on Tube if you don't live close to there) and stops at midnight, so if you are particularly 'lucky' with immigration, you have to take the Tube. Picc Line has the advantage of running even after midnight (at least on Fri evenings) - but can someone explain to me please why about 1/2 of the trains from Heathrow end in places like Hounslow West, Osterley etc.? How many people, on an average Friday night, go from Heathrow Terminals 1, 2, 3 to Hounslow West?
Immigration: Incredibly bad. By far the worst experience so far. Worse than Schiphol, and that airport is my sworn enemy. Expect non functioning biometric gates and 1km long queues (to show the returning British citizens a warm welcome perhaps?)
Toilets: Fine (9/10, definitely would pee there again)
Other facilities: Posh. Maybe even posher than that.
Wifi: Exists but requires signing up, therefore half way to bollocks.
Worst experience: Arrived by the last evening plane from M. the other day. The plane was delayed, we landed ca 11 pm. I spent more than 1 hour at a queue for the immigration checks. Result: I missed the last Heathrow Express. Had to go by Piccadilly Line, all the way to the city, on a Friday night. At first (up to zone 3) it was all right, then it started to be really dodgy. Dodgy but probably safe, because all the people were so drunk they could not harm anyone but themselves.
Overall satisfaction: 5/10. Don't like that much.
Gatwick
How big: Moderate. Has two terminals, North and South, linked by a little DLR-like train.
Amount of silly walking around: Excessive. Considering the size of the airport, it's absolutely insane.
Transport to/from the airport: Funny. A bit idiotic. There are trains to London Bridge or to Victoria. If you want to go to Ldn Bridge, you can use your Oyster, which is good but a bit expensive. When buying tickets (for example because you have a railcard), you have to basically know who operates the train you intend to take - so in theory you have to go, pick a train in advance and check who's running the thing. It's not that tickets valid for every train are too expensive - they do not exist. Also, during the weekdays, you can get to/from Gatwick in 40 min. However, during the weekends, the trains suddenly change into a train which, if you put a stick in the ground with a handwritten note on it, the train would stop there. So it takes a solid hour to get to London. (Not counting in the time you wait for the trains, which, with the popular game of biggest delays, can be considerable.)
Immigration: No complains. Took me less than 3 min every time I went there.
Toilets: Could be much worse (7/10)
Other facilities: Okay.
Wifi: Probably exists but I've actually never tried.
Worst experience: They lost my bag when I went to Amsterdam. The bag just stayed there at Gatwick. Which I find pretty pathetic.
Overall satisfaction: 5/10
Stansted
How big: Moderate. A bit like Manchester Airport.
Amount of silly walking around: Reasonable.
Transport to/from the airport: Stansted Express. So far so good, I love this train. OK, it costs £16.60 and takes 50 min from Liverpool Street, but name a cheap train to a London airport, I'll wait. I've taken Stansted Express several times and every time it was on time (actually a big deal in this country, trust me). Not like some other trains which stop all the time or don't even start moving 'due to shortage of staff' or for some similarly stupid reason. Also, the train stops ca 3 min from the airport terminal and all the stuff, which I find cool.
Immigration: No complains. Took me less than 3 min every time I went there.
Toilets: Fine (8/10)
Other facilities: Okay.
Wifi: Probably exists but I've actually never tried.
Worst experience: None. And that's why I like this airport so much.
Overall satisfaction: 8/10. My personal favourite (for now).
Luton
How big: Moderate.
Amount of silly walking around: Moderate to low.
Transport to/from the airport: Disaster. Travesty. There is a train (from London St Pancras / Blackfriars / City Thameslink), but that only goes to Luton Airport Parkway. And then you have to take a bus which, in about 10-15 min, takes you to the airport. The problems are obvious: i) The bus is always late, and always stuck in some traffic, no matter what. ii) You cannot stack a trainload of people with huge bags into a bus. You just cannot. iii) You have to buy train tickets to 'Luton Airport', not 'Luton Airport Parkway'. If you don't, they make you pay £2.40 or something for the ridiculous bus. On your way back, you have to get your train ticket from a pair of lousy machines just after you leave the airport - expect a lengthy queue of tourists who have no idea how to operate our super-intuitive ticket machines. iv) The people using this particular airport seem to be more stupid than at the other airports. They are apparently not intelligent enough to use a bus in any reasonable way, to board so that someone else can also board, to leave the bus quicker than in 15 minutes of total confusion, tripping over own bags, tripping over other people's bags, pushing people, etc.
Immigration: No complains. Took me less than 3 min every time I went there.
Toilets: OK (7/10)
Other facilities: Okay.
Wifi: Probably exists but I've actually never tried.
Worst experience: On my way to R., the airline staff checked our boarding passes and made us all stay in one big room with no facilities other than a drinks vending machine. It was early morning and there were several babies and small children, and there was nowhere to sit (not even for mothers with babies), and the room was too small for a planeload of people, so it was also quite crowded. So some kid started crying out of annoyance (which in my opinion was totally justified), and then the other kids joined in, and basically everyone was pissed off, and then the plane - which was the first morning plane - was 30 min late, so it all added up to a very cool beginning. (To be fair, I am not sure this is the fault of the airport. It may well be the shitty airline, Wizz...)
Overall satisfaction: 1/10. An airport to avoid.
City
How big: Small.
Amount of silly walking around: Zero.
Transport to/from the airport: DLR. It's zone 3, which is both unbelievable and awesome.
Immigration: N/A (only outbound flight so far)
Toilets: Fine (7/10)
Other facilities: Okay. They are tiny, but they have coffee and sandwiches and blueberry muffins, and what more do you need.
Wifi: Probably exists but I've actually never tried.
Worst experience: For some reason planes that would suit me seem to avoid this airport. What a shame.
Overall satisfaction: cannot be assessed because there are not enough flights to/from LCY
Southend
How big: Tiny.
Amount of silly walking around: Zero.
Transport to/from the airport: Train. Takes an hour but takes you 2 min from the terminal.
Immigration: N/A (only outbound flight so far)
Toilets: Fine (8/10)
Other facilities: Okay. There is coffee and sandwiches and even a restaurant and a bookshop, so you can fix everything there.
Wifi: Probably exists but I've actually never tried.
Worst experience: Nothing in particular.
Overall satisfaction: 7/10
Heathrow
How big: One of the biggest in the world.
Amount of silly walking around: Moderate. Actually good when you consider the size of this airport. The only exception is getting to/from train or the Tube. That is a proper hike.
Transport to/from the airport: Airport of extremes. Heathrow Express (15 min) or Piccadilly Line (60 min). Heathrow Express is awesome but actually only goes to Paddington (so you have to do another 45 min on Tube if you don't live close to there) and stops at midnight, so if you are particularly 'lucky' with immigration, you have to take the Tube. Picc Line has the advantage of running even after midnight (at least on Fri evenings) - but can someone explain to me please why about 1/2 of the trains from Heathrow end in places like Hounslow West, Osterley etc.? How many people, on an average Friday night, go from Heathrow Terminals 1, 2, 3 to Hounslow West?
Immigration: Incredibly bad. By far the worst experience so far. Worse than Schiphol, and that airport is my sworn enemy. Expect non functioning biometric gates and 1km long queues (to show the returning British citizens a warm welcome perhaps?)
Toilets: Fine (9/10, definitely would pee there again)
Other facilities: Posh. Maybe even posher than that.
Wifi: Exists but requires signing up, therefore half way to bollocks.
Worst experience: Arrived by the last evening plane from M. the other day. The plane was delayed, we landed ca 11 pm. I spent more than 1 hour at a queue for the immigration checks. Result: I missed the last Heathrow Express. Had to go by Piccadilly Line, all the way to the city, on a Friday night. At first (up to zone 3) it was all right, then it started to be really dodgy. Dodgy but probably safe, because all the people were so drunk they could not harm anyone but themselves.
Overall satisfaction: 5/10. Don't like that much.
Gatwick
How big: Moderate. Has two terminals, North and South, linked by a little DLR-like train.
Amount of silly walking around: Excessive. Considering the size of the airport, it's absolutely insane.
Transport to/from the airport: Funny. A bit idiotic. There are trains to London Bridge or to Victoria. If you want to go to Ldn Bridge, you can use your Oyster, which is good but a bit expensive. When buying tickets (for example because you have a railcard), you have to basically know who operates the train you intend to take - so in theory you have to go, pick a train in advance and check who's running the thing. It's not that tickets valid for every train are too expensive - they do not exist. Also, during the weekdays, you can get to/from Gatwick in 40 min. However, during the weekends, the trains suddenly change into a train which, if you put a stick in the ground with a handwritten note on it, the train would stop there. So it takes a solid hour to get to London. (Not counting in the time you wait for the trains, which, with the popular game of biggest delays, can be considerable.)
Immigration: No complains. Took me less than 3 min every time I went there.
Toilets: Could be much worse (7/10)
Other facilities: Okay.
Wifi: Probably exists but I've actually never tried.
Worst experience: They lost my bag when I went to Amsterdam. The bag just stayed there at Gatwick. Which I find pretty pathetic.
Overall satisfaction: 5/10
Stansted
How big: Moderate. A bit like Manchester Airport.
Amount of silly walking around: Reasonable.
Transport to/from the airport: Stansted Express. So far so good, I love this train. OK, it costs £16.60 and takes 50 min from Liverpool Street, but name a cheap train to a London airport, I'll wait. I've taken Stansted Express several times and every time it was on time (actually a big deal in this country, trust me). Not like some other trains which stop all the time or don't even start moving 'due to shortage of staff' or for some similarly stupid reason. Also, the train stops ca 3 min from the airport terminal and all the stuff, which I find cool.
Immigration: No complains. Took me less than 3 min every time I went there.
Toilets: Fine (8/10)
Other facilities: Okay.
Wifi: Probably exists but I've actually never tried.
Worst experience: None. And that's why I like this airport so much.
Overall satisfaction: 8/10. My personal favourite (for now).
Luton
How big: Moderate.
Amount of silly walking around: Moderate to low.
Transport to/from the airport: Disaster. Travesty. There is a train (from London St Pancras / Blackfriars / City Thameslink), but that only goes to Luton Airport Parkway. And then you have to take a bus which, in about 10-15 min, takes you to the airport. The problems are obvious: i) The bus is always late, and always stuck in some traffic, no matter what. ii) You cannot stack a trainload of people with huge bags into a bus. You just cannot. iii) You have to buy train tickets to 'Luton Airport', not 'Luton Airport Parkway'. If you don't, they make you pay £2.40 or something for the ridiculous bus. On your way back, you have to get your train ticket from a pair of lousy machines just after you leave the airport - expect a lengthy queue of tourists who have no idea how to operate our super-intuitive ticket machines. iv) The people using this particular airport seem to be more stupid than at the other airports. They are apparently not intelligent enough to use a bus in any reasonable way, to board so that someone else can also board, to leave the bus quicker than in 15 minutes of total confusion, tripping over own bags, tripping over other people's bags, pushing people, etc.
Immigration: No complains. Took me less than 3 min every time I went there.
Toilets: OK (7/10)
Other facilities: Okay.
Wifi: Probably exists but I've actually never tried.
Worst experience: On my way to R., the airline staff checked our boarding passes and made us all stay in one big room with no facilities other than a drinks vending machine. It was early morning and there were several babies and small children, and there was nowhere to sit (not even for mothers with babies), and the room was too small for a planeload of people, so it was also quite crowded. So some kid started crying out of annoyance (which in my opinion was totally justified), and then the other kids joined in, and basically everyone was pissed off, and then the plane - which was the first morning plane - was 30 min late, so it all added up to a very cool beginning. (To be fair, I am not sure this is the fault of the airport. It may well be the shitty airline, Wizz...)
Overall satisfaction: 1/10. An airport to avoid.
City
How big: Small.
Amount of silly walking around: Zero.
Transport to/from the airport: DLR. It's zone 3, which is both unbelievable and awesome.
Immigration: N/A (only outbound flight so far)
Toilets: Fine (7/10)
Other facilities: Okay. They are tiny, but they have coffee and sandwiches and blueberry muffins, and what more do you need.
Wifi: Probably exists but I've actually never tried.
Worst experience: For some reason planes that would suit me seem to avoid this airport. What a shame.
Overall satisfaction: cannot be assessed because there are not enough flights to/from LCY
Southend
How big: Tiny.
Amount of silly walking around: Zero.
Transport to/from the airport: Train. Takes an hour but takes you 2 min from the terminal.
Immigration: N/A (only outbound flight so far)
Toilets: Fine (8/10)
Other facilities: Okay. There is coffee and sandwiches and even a restaurant and a bookshop, so you can fix everything there.
Wifi: Probably exists but I've actually never tried.
Worst experience: Nothing in particular.
Overall satisfaction: 7/10
Subscribe to:
Posts (Atom)