Advertisement
If you have a new account but are having problems posting or verifying your account, please email us on hello@boards.ie for help. Thanks :)
Hello all! Please ensure that you are posting a new thread or question in the appropriate forum. The Feedback forum is overwhelmed with questions that are having to be moved elsewhere. If you need help to verify your account contact hello@boards.ie

Our Greater London Megathread

Options
1…6162646667…96

Comments

  • Options
    #1892
    Wrongway1985
    Registered Users Posts: 6,350 ✭✭✭Wrongway1985


    oakshade wrote: »
    Hi all. Great sticky. Going to be heading to London shortly for a conference and some meetings. Flying into Stansted and most likely spending all of my time within Zone 1 & 2. Whats the best / most cost effective ticket to get? Stansted express and a top up Oyster card or should I look at a daily ticket? I will be there for 3 days. Thank you.

    Get a proper train or bus those express yolks are for tourists (more expensive) ;)


  • Options
    #1893
    rainbow kirby
    Moderators, Regional Abroad Moderators Posts: 26,928 Mod ✭✭✭✭rainbow kirby


    Stansted Express is worth it if you book a 30 day advance fare. £15 return last time I used it. Hate absolutely everything about flying in or out of STN though.


  • Options
    #1894
    Fred Swanson
    Closed Accounts Posts: 21,730 ✭✭✭✭Fred Swanson


    This post has been deleted.


  • Options
    #1895
    oakshade
    Registered Users Posts: 505 ✭✭✭oakshade


    rainbow kirby wrote:
    Stansted Express is worth it if you book a 30 day advance fare. £15 return last time I used it. Hate absolutely everything about flying in or out of STN though.


    Oh dear... never been in Stansted before. Forwarn me please ☺. Only reason I booked it is because of the choice and variety of very cheap Ryanair flights.


  • Options
    #1896
    Fred Swanson
    Closed Accounts Posts: 21,730 ✭✭✭✭Fred Swanson


    This post has been deleted.


  • Advertisement
  • Options
    #1897
    LXFlyer
    Registered Users Posts: 17,557 ✭✭✭✭LXFlyer


    oakshade wrote: »
    Oh dear... never been in Stansted before. Forwarn me please ☺. Only reason I booked it is because of the choice and variety of very cheap Ryanair flights.

    This is the classic mistake that people make.

    Flying to and staying in London you need to factor in three elements:

    1) Location of hotel
    2) Cost of flights
    3) Cost of airport transfers

    What may appear to be the cheaper option based on flight prices alone isn't always the best one to choose.

    You need to do research on all three before making a decision.


  • Options
    #1898
    rainbow kirby
    Moderators, Regional Abroad Moderators Posts: 26,928 Mod ✭✭✭✭rainbow kirby


    Fred Swanson wrote: »
    This post has been deleted.

    ^ What he said. All the worst things about the Ryanair experience condensed into one. I'm happy to pay extra to fly from Heathrow or London City these days.


  • Options
    #1899
    Strumms
    Registered Users Posts: 24,839 ✭✭✭✭Strumms


    Stansted is awful. Gatwick is my airport of choice for London. Cheap and convenient to get into the city and back to the airport. Also you have healthy competition and many flights per day between Ryanair and Aer Lingus so you can get some very good pricing on that route.


  • Options
    #1900
    EndaHonesty
    Closed Accounts Posts: 1,544 ✭✭✭EndaHonesty


    Strumms wrote: »
    Stansted is awful. Gatwick is my airport of choice for London. Cheap and convenient to get into the city and back to the airport. Also you have healthy competition and many flights per day between Ryanair and Aer Lingus so you can get some very good pricing on that route.

    Both Gatwick and Stanstead are around 50km from Central London.

    Heathrow is around 30km from Central London.

    Depending on which part of London you're heading to, each airport has it's benefits.


  • Options
    #1901
    Louche Lad
    Registered Users Posts: 1,089 ✭✭✭Louche Lad


    rainbow kirby wrote: »
    Stansted Express is worth it if you book a 30 day advance fare. £15 return last time I used it. Hate absolutely everything about flying in or out of STN though.
    Fred Swanson wrote: »
    This post has been deleted.
    Strumms wrote: »
    Stansted is awful. Gatwick is my airport of choice for London. Cheap and convenient to get into the city and back to the airport. Also you have healthy competition and many flights per day between Ryanair and Aer Lingus so you can get some very good pricing on that route.

    Is Stansted really that awful? I quite liked it last time I went through (though it was a few years ago and maybe I was there at a quiet time of day).


  • Advertisement
  • Options
    #1902
    Fred Swanson
    Closed Accounts Posts: 21,730 ✭✭✭✭Fred Swanson


    This post has been deleted.


  • Options
    #1903
    EndaHonesty
    Closed Accounts Posts: 1,544 ✭✭✭EndaHonesty


    Louche Lad wrote: »
    Is Stansted really that awful? I quite liked it last time I went through (though it was a few years ago and maybe I was there at a quiet time of day).

    Of course not, no rational person "hates" an airport.
    It's a building you pass through on the way somewhere else, you usually spend 1-2hrs there, max.

    Stanstead is a perfectly good airport if you're heading to/leaving from N.E. London.
    Gatwick is a good choice if you're heading to/leaving from South London.
    Heathrow is a good choice if you're heading to/leaving from N.W. London.

    Is airport snobbery a thing now?! :rolleyes:


  • Options
    #1904
    Louche Lad
    Registered Users Posts: 1,089 ✭✭✭Louche Lad


    EndaHonesty wrote: »
    Of course not, no rational person "hates" an airport.
    It's a building you pass through on the way somewhere else, you usually spend 1-2hrs there, max.

    Stanstead is a perfectly good airport if you're heading to/leaving from N.E. London.
    Gatwick is a good choice if you're heading to/leaving from South London.
    Heathrow is a good choice if you're heading to/leaving from N.W. London.

    Is airport snobbery a thing now?! :rolleyes:

    All airports are awful. But some are more awful than others. Here's a thread on Beauvais, for example – the problems with an airport come to light when you have to spend three hours in one (because you often have to ensure you're there in good time) and there's inadequate seating, insufficient toilets and poor catering.


  • Options
    #1905
    LXFlyer
    Registered Users Posts: 17,557 ✭✭✭✭LXFlyer


    Louche Lad wrote: »
    All airports are awful. But some are more awful than others. Here's a thread on Beauvais, for example – the problems with an airport come to light when you have to spend three hours in one (because you often have to ensure you're there in good time) and there's inadequate seating, insufficient toilets and poor catering.

    That's a very personal opinion - quite a lot of people (including myself) do enjoy travelling through airports.

    Just because you don't enjoy them doesn't mean that others don't.

    Some airports are not as good as others, but to suggest that all are awful is very wide of the mark.


  • Options
    #1906
    Strumms
    Registered Users Posts: 24,839 ✭✭✭✭Strumms


    EndaHonesty wrote: »
    Of course not, no rational person "hates" an airport.
    It's a building you pass through on the way somewhere else, you usually spend 1-2hrs there, max.

    Stanstead is a perfectly good airport if you're heading to/leaving from N.E. London.
    Gatwick is a good choice if you're heading to/leaving from South London.
    Heathrow is a good choice if you're heading to/leaving from N.W. London.

    Is airport snobbery a thing now?! :rolleyes:


    May I ask do you travel much at all ? To call it a building you pass through is just simplifying it just a tad, a bit like calling a football stadium a big meeting place where like you imply you should have no real expectations as a customer towards your experience there. As flyers part of what we pay is airport taxes so to have expectations or opinions is an entitlement.. the irrational comment I'll ignore as it's idiotic.

    I travel a lot for work, I happen to work in the airline business so my work rarely takes me further afield then the offices there. I travel often and I usually book later flights then I might need to give me some padding for any delays at the job which happens so it's not unusual for me or indeed others to have 3 hours or sometimes more to kill but not enough time to go sightseeing. To expect a level of comfort, service, politeness and decent amenities is not asking for much exactly.

    Stansted in my view anyway doesn't do any of the above at all well...


  • Options
    #1907
    Louche Lad
    Registered Users Posts: 1,089 ✭✭✭Louche Lad


    lxflyer wrote: »
    That's a very personal opinion - quite a lot of people (including myself) do enjoy travelling through airports.

    Just because you don't enjoy them doesn't mean that others don't.

    Some airports are not as good as others, but to suggest that all are awful is very wide of the mark.

    Was just tongue-in-cheek — was weakly paraphrasing George Orwell's "All animals are equal. But some are more equal than others" or something like that. Some airports are fine (I thought Stansted was, but looks like it's no longer the case).

    Really, I think an airport should be just a competent tool or a machine — something to get a job done, without causing hassles. Like a dishwasher should get my dishes clean, like a USB lead should connect my phone to a charger, so an airport should allow me to get on/off a plane without stressing me or holding me up unduly.

    I derive no enjoyment from dishwashers or USB leads. Why should airports be different?


  • Options
    #1908
    LXFlyer
    Registered Users Posts: 17,557 ✭✭✭✭LXFlyer


    Wrongway1985 wrote: »
    Get a proper train or bus those express yolks are for tourists (more expensive) ;)

    Just to point out that in Stansted that is a bit tricky.

    There are no other trains heading towards London from Stansted other than the Stansted Express, which in reality is not like either the Gatwick Express or Heathrow Express, given it's just a normal train.


  • Options
    #1909
    EndaHonesty
    Closed Accounts Posts: 1,544 ✭✭✭EndaHonesty


    Strumms wrote: »
    May I ask do you travel much at all ? To call it a building you pass through is just simplifying it just a tad, a bit like calling a football stadium a big meeting place where like you imply you should have no real expectations as a customer towards your experience there. As flyers part of what we pay is airport taxes so to have expectations or opinions is an entitlement.. the irrational comment I'll ignore as it's idiotic.

    I travel a lot for work, I happen to work in the airline business so my work rarely takes me further afield then the offices there. I travel often and I usually book later flights then I might need to give me some padding for any delays at the job which happens so it's not unusual for me or indeed others to have 3 hours or sometimes more to kill but not enough time to go sightseeing. To expect a level of comfort, service, politeness and decent amenities is not asking for much exactly.

    Stansted in my view anyway doesn't do any of the above at all well...

    Logic fail! :o

    A football stadium is a destination, an airport is simply a building you pass through on the way to your destination, not the same thing at all.

    The fact you work in an airport probably makes you the least objective person to judge an airport's quality. It's too personal for you.

    Having "expectations", especially these days when travel is no longer a luxury is, IMO, naive.
    "Expectations" are so subjective, it's silly really. Some would say, idiotic even...


  • Options
    #1910
    rainbow kirby
    Moderators, Regional Abroad Moderators Posts: 26,928 Mod ✭✭✭✭rainbow kirby


    Strumms wrote: »
    To expect a level of comfort, service, politeness and decent amenities is not asking for much exactly.

    Stansted in my view anyway doesn't do any of the above at all well...

    +1

    Service and politeness are non-existent at Stansted and Luton - there is something about airports which only deal with low cost airlines which makes people really nasty. Both of them are busy to an uncomfortable degree all the time too - can be very hard to find anywhere to sit down at Luton in particular at peak times. All restaurants painfully crowded at Stansted all the time - even flying out on a Tuesday at lunchtime in October.

    The experience flying through other airports is objectively better - because LCY is so business traveller focused there are lots of places to sit with phone/laptop charging points, the coffee is decent, the staff are generally pretty polite, it's in zone 4 so I haven't had to pay the earth or take all year to get there, the security queues are never terrible...


  • Options
    #1911
    LXFlyer
    Registered Users Posts: 17,557 ✭✭✭✭LXFlyer


    rainbow kirby wrote: »
    +1

    Service and politeness are non-existent at Stansted and Luton - there is something about airports which only deal with low cost airlines which makes people really nasty. Both of them are busy to an uncomfortable degree all the time too - can be very hard to find anywhere to sit down at Luton in particular at peak times. All restaurants painfully crowded at Stansted all the time - even flying out on a Tuesday at lunchtime in October.

    The experience flying through other airports is objectively better - because LCY is so business traveller focused there are lots of places to sit with phone/laptop charging points, the coffee is decent, the staff are generally pretty polite, it's in zone 4 so I haven't had to pay the earth or take all year to get there, the security queues are never terrible...

    London City is actually in zone 3 - even better!


  • Advertisement
  • Options
    #1912
    LXFlyer
    Registered Users Posts: 17,557 ✭✭✭✭LXFlyer


    EndaHonesty wrote: »
    Logic fail! :o

    A football stadium is a destination, an airport is simply a building you pass through on the way to your destination, not the same thing at all.

    The fact you work in an airport probably makes you the least objective person to judge an airport's quality. It's too personal for you.

    Having "expectations", especially these days when travel is no longer a luxury is, IMO, naive.
    "Expectations" are so subjective, it's silly really. Some would say, idiotic even...

    Different people have different expectations, depending upon the nature of their travel.

    Leisure travellers will tend to have less expectations than business travellers, but at the same time everyone should expect an airport to be a reasonably pleasant experience, and for staff to be polite.


  • Options
    #1913
    EndaHonesty
    Closed Accounts Posts: 1,544 ✭✭✭EndaHonesty


    lxflyer wrote: »
    Different people have different expectations, depending upon the nature of their travel.

    Leisure travellers will tend to have less expectations than business travellers, but at the same time everyone should expect an airport to be a reasonably pleasant experience, and for staff to be polite.

    Exactly my point, one person's "reasonably pleasant" is another person's "ZOMG Outrageous!"...


  • Options
    #1914
    LXFlyer
    Registered Users Posts: 17,557 ✭✭✭✭LXFlyer


    EndaHonesty wrote: »
    Exactly my point, one person's "reasonably pleasant" is another person's "ZOMG Outrageous!"...



    Well I don't consider it much to expect basic levels of service and politeness anywhere (not just in an airport), and I think that the vast majority would agree with that.


    If some people consider that too much then tough - no one is forcing them to use the service.


  • Options
    #1915
    EndaHonesty
    Closed Accounts Posts: 1,544 ✭✭✭EndaHonesty


    lxflyer wrote: »
    If some people consider that too much then tough - no one is forcing them to use the service.

    I don't understand what you mean here? Who considers basic levels too much?


  • Options
    #1916
    LXFlyer
    Registered Users Posts: 17,557 ✭✭✭✭LXFlyer


    EndaHonesty wrote: »
    I don't understand what you mean here? Who considers basic levels too much?

    Well while different users will have different expectations, I think everyone would expect staff to be courteous and polite rather than rude and officious, sufficient places to sit down, and basic facilities such as cafés and toilets that are kept clean and tidy.

    Or do you consider that too much to expect, because you seem to be implying that you do?

    Beyond that business travellers will tend to expect more facilities.


  • Options
    #1917
    Strumms
    Registered Users Posts: 24,839 ✭✭✭✭Strumms


    EndaHonesty wrote: »
    Logic fail! :o

    A football stadium is a destination, an airport is simply a building you pass through on the way to your destination, not the same thing at all.

    The fact you work in an airport probably makes you the least objective person to judge an airport's quality. It's too personal for you.

    Having "expectations", especially these days when travel is no longer a luxury is, IMO, naive.
    "Expectations" are so subjective, it's silly really. Some would say, idiotic even...

    Somewhat the most bizarre illogical reply to any point I've read on boards and there have been a few. :pac:

    Firstly, if you yourself just see an airport as a giant processing center of people going from point A-B.. that is your own view. You are in the minority however and this is not only recognized by travelers frequent and otherwise but by airports themselves, including Stansted who at this moment are spending literally millions of pounds upgrading their airside facilities for passengers, as have Gatwick recently, as have Heathrow also as well as many airports around the world who are in competition for business, leisure and connecting travelers. You own opinions don't seem at all educated and certainly are not in line with the views of people who travel or those within the industry...

    expectations in your view are subjective, silly, idiotic ??? I really don't know why you post in this forum if that is the best you can offer but troll away. ;)


  • Options
    #1918
    EndaHonesty
    Closed Accounts Posts: 1,544 ✭✭✭EndaHonesty


    lxflyer wrote: »
    Well while different users will have different expectations, I think everyone would expect staff to be courteous and polite rather than rude and officious, sufficient places to sit down, and basic facilities such as cafés and toilets that are kept clean and tidy.

    Or do you consider that too much to expect, because you seem to be implying that you do?

    Beyond that business travellers will tend to expect more facilities.

    Where did I imply that I consider basic standards to be too much?!

    Of course I expect service to be professional, staff to be polite and facilities to be adequate.

    I have been to Heathrow, Gatwick & Stanstead many times and each one has been perfectly fine, with everything I needed for my visit.

    Stanstead is being made out to be some shed in the middle of nowhere with angry staff who hate the passengers. This is simply not true.


  • Options
    #1919
    EndaHonesty
    Closed Accounts Posts: 1,544 ✭✭✭EndaHonesty


    Strumms wrote: »
    including Stansted who at this moment are spending literally millions of pounds upgrading their airside facilities for passengers

    Do you have link to this "millions of pounds" of upgrades?


  • Options
    #1920
    Strumms
    Registered Users Posts: 24,839 ✭✭✭✭Strumms


    EndaHonesty wrote: »
    Do you have link to this "millions of pounds" of upgrades?

    since your google must be broken..

    http://www.stanstedairport.com/about-us/media-centre/press-releases/80-million-terminal-transformation-at-stansted-phase-2-complete/


  • Advertisement
  • Options
    #1921
    EndaHonesty
    Closed Accounts Posts: 1,544 ✭✭✭EndaHonesty


    Strumms wrote: »
    since your google must be broken..

    http://www.stanstedairport.com/about-us/media-centre/press-releases/80-million-terminal-transformation-at-stansted-phase-2-complete/

    This work was completed in April 2015, so they are not "at this moment spending literally millions of pounds upgrading their airside facilities for passengers".

    I have been to Stansted since this work has been completed, have you?


Advertisement