Bleagh

[spudtater]

Train journey yesterday from Newbury back to Edinburgh was delayed by flooding. Ended up taking ten and a half bloody hours. Not fun. Had time to read the Metro article complaining about Brits being "addicted to short-haul flights" rather than taking trains.

Yes, I am addicted to not being stuck for three hours in a glorified metal cylinder parked outside Crewe railway station. Shocking habit, I know.

Also: W... T... F? (Has sound).

Comments

[sigmonster.livejournal.com]

Airplanes are tubes made out of metal. Clearly this is entirely different from a glorified metal cylinder. Also flights are never delayed by fog, strong winds, pointless security theatre, strikes or crewing problems. And I am a robot chicken made out of tofu and noodles. Buk-buk-buk!






(Apologies for the sarcasm, it was irrestible. Not that I tried very hard. I'm also sorry that you had such a bad journey. Better luck next time...)

[spudtater.livejournal.com]

I admit that I once had a flight delayed on me. Once in my entire life, that is. Whereas with rail, well, exactly half the journeys I've ever taken have had significant delays.

And when my plane was delayed, they have you waiting in a nice air-conditioned airport, with shops! Carrying food! And magazines or newspapers to buy, if you're bored. And toilets which aren't a tip. Why, it's almost like civilisation. Whereas on the train, you're stuck in a cramped train, getting hotter by the minute, with the on-board shop having run out of food and drink, nothing to read, with about one toilet for every hundred people.

I'm just glad the train wasn't delayed earlier in the journey, when people were standing packed into the aisles, because it's apparently legal to sell twice as many train tickets as there are seats.

All in all, for the level of service you get on a train I'd pay... maybe a fifth of what I would for a plane ticket. In reality, train tickets are actually more expensive. I would have to be insane to actually choose to travel by train. What I would pay for, by contrast, is the privelege of seeing self-satisfied green-posturing politicians being forced to put their money where their oversized mouths are and having to travel in actual British trains, in economy class, at peak times. Let's see how long they can tolerate it.

Thank you, end rant.

[sigmonster.livejournal.com]

Most of the flights I've ever taken have been transatlantic, so between 8 and 12 hours, as a matter of routine, with 2 hour check-in times. This may colour my views a little. And when they're delayed in the air you get no shops, no more food, and far more cramped seating. And you arrive between 20 and 40 minutes further travel away from the place where you actually want to be.

Also Newbury to Edinburgh will be Virgin Trains, yes? Which explains eveything.

[spudtater.livejournal.com]

Plane seating more cramped than trains? Not in my experience.

> Virgin Trains, yes? Which explains eveything.

I do have to admit at this point that when I mentioned that "exactly half" of train journeys I've taken have had significant delays, that the exact same half have been with Virgin Trains.

So maybe I am being unfair in tarring all train operators with the same brush.

[xquiq.livejournal.com]

I must admit that I have been delayed very few times when flying, but innumerable times when travelling by train.

I've also noticed that people think it's acceptable to behave in ways on long train journeys that most wouldn't even think of on a flight (shouting, mobile phones blaring, playing music, getting drunk on a 12 pack of Tennants, badly behaved children etc).

[bracknellexile.livejournal.com]

Reading all the comments above, I must admit I quite like the train. Regularly do Edinburgh-Carlisle for work (rarely delayed) and Edinburgh-London (ditto) for visiting various folks.

Edinburgh-London by train = 4 1/2 hours from Waverley to Kings Cross + 30mins on tube to centre of town = 5 hrs
Edinburgh - London(Stansted, Luton, Heathrow, Gatwick) by plane = 30 min bus-ride to airport, 1hr check-in, 1hr flight, 30mins baggage collection, 1hr bus/train/tube into town = 4 hrs

So plane is slightly faster, but with the train, I get on, sit down, go to sleep and wake up in London. With the plane it's non-stop moving and hassle. Train is much more relaxing. Give me that any day - even more so if it's to somewhere not near an airport.

And there is definitely more leg-room on the new Virgin trains than on a plane.

Okay, yeah, being forced to stand sucks I'll give you that, but this is why I always book in advance and get a seat - and get tickets that usually beat the plane prices too. Even the 1p flights get ramped up by the airport taxes to about the same as apex train tickets.

[spudtater.livejournal.com]

> 4 1/2 hours from Waverley to Kings Cross

Really? Which operator? What route?

> And there is definitely more leg-room on the new Virgin trains

Not on the Voyager ones, that's for sure. (Well, leg room is about the same, but the seats are narrower). Possibly on the Pendelinos, but I've never been on one.

[martling.livejournal.com]

Really? Which operator? What route?

GNER, the east coast line. Times vary a bit but between 4:30 and 5:10 I think. The refurbished trains have power sockets and wireless too, though the latter is overpriced.

[spudtater.livejournal.com]

Hmmm... sounds better than Virgin, anyway.