In message , at 23:52:58 on Fri, 8 Nov
2019, MissRiaElaine remarked:
On 08/11/2019 20:23, Roland Perry wrote:
In message , at 14:37:03 on Fri, 8
Nov 2019, MissRiaElaine remarked:
On 08/11/2019 06:30, John Levine wrote:

Here in the US, the normal thing at an airport is to rent a car, not
to take a taxi.

I've never done that when arriving from the UK. I'm usually too
jet-lagged to even think about driving. I mostly stay with friends,
so either they pick me up or I get a taxi. If I need a car, I'll get
it the next day.

I have picked up cars at airports on internal flights, though.

UK internal, or USA internal?

USA internal. San Francisco to San Diego usually.

As a regular and seasoned traveller (and also not "destination London"),
you've ruled yourself out of the population under discussion.
--
Roland Perry

In message , at 20:43:18 on Fri, 8 Nov
2019, Clive D.W. Feather remarked:
In article , Roland Perry
writes
As a result, and even as a more adventurous traveller (colleagues were
amazed I dared get a bus from Geneva to the airport, and didn't even
consider rail) I think I've only once got a train on first arrival at a
suitably equipped overseas airport.

Working backwards through my travel log.

Vienna: caught the CAT train then the U-bahn to the hotel. No problem.
Possibly CAT is overpriced but it went to the right place and I could
buy a ticket right in the terminal.

Seoul: first trip I used the express bus that stopped outside the
company hotel rather than two or three (long) metro trips and then a 2
km taxi in a country where I can't even read the signs. Second trip,
just used the metro to the (different) hotel; both cheaper and faster
than the express bus.

Seattle: wasn't going anywhere on the tram, so rented a car (perhaps I
should have tried Uber, but I never have so far). In the past I've used
the tram. I forget what I did before there were trams.

Minneapolis St.Paul: wasn't staying near the metro, such as it is, and
wasn't staying close enough to the meeting place to walk, so rented a
car.

Perth: got picked up by relatives this time. Last time, rented a car
because I was going several hundred km. When I returned the car I took
bus+metro to my hotel. (I eventually left Perth by train.)

Sydney: train. Opal card. Trivial.

Cairns: no metro, rented a car. But did catch the train once.

Copenhagen: metro or train every time (including to Aalborg, Lund, and
Goteborg).

Atlanta: MARTA works fine. What's the problem?

Singapo metro, of course.

Madrid: metro.

AYQ: got the dedicated bus service.

Melbourne: bus to central area, then tram to hotel. Trams and local
trains thereafter (left Melbourne on a coach trip).

Hobart: rented a car because going to catch the Ida Bay railway then
drive to Launceston.

Cagliari: rented a car because was going all over the place. But did
ride the entire tram network while I was there.

Aalborg: no trams to hotel, so used a taxi.

San Francisco: always been going somewhere that needs a car, though I
have used the San Jose trams (and once acted as conductor on one).

Billund: no public transport and needed to get to Aalborg.

Hong Kong: metro and tram. Octopus card. Simples.

Amsterdam: train and tram.

Montreal: from memory, express bus to the city (Dorval train wasn't
workable) but metro in the city.

Calgary: rented a car because had to drive half way to Banff.

ACE: rented a car because going all over the place.

DFW: rented a car because it's nowhere near D or FW with no public
transport I can find.

Stockholm: train and metro.

That's 7 years; I think I'll stop there.

An interesting history from a seasoned and adventurous traveller. As
such you've ruled yourself out of the target market under discussion.

--
Roland Perry

wrote:
On Sat, 9 Nov 2019 02:18:00 -0000 (UTC)
Recliner wrote:
John Levine wrote:
In article ,
Recliner wrote:
Aside from Hex I suspect the piccadilly line will face a hefty slump in
passengers too given how slow and uncomfortable it is.

Yes, quite likely: for many pax, Crossrail will be the better option. I'm
not one of them, but will be delighted if the Tube trains are less packed.

Since TfL gets the fare whether you take the Picc or Crossrail,
wouldn't that be their cunning plan to free up more underground
capacity?

I think both are cheap enough that pax will choose between them based on
convenience, not price. It really depends on whether the Piccadilly or
Crossrail routes suit you better.

Oddly enough, the only interchange stations between the Piccadilly and
Crossrail are at Heathrow, so they serve a different set of central London
stations. The Piccadilly then goes on to serve north London, and Crossrail,
the City and east London. So, if you're heading for Padd, Farringdon or
Liverpool St, choose Crossrail; for Kings Cross St Pancras, the Piccadilly.

Even if you're going somewhere in north london on the piccadilly line it
would probably still be considerably quicker to take crossrail and change
in central london twice. As for KX - Farringdon then 1 stop on the met or
thameslink, finsbury park - farringdon then 2 stops on thameslink (if they
can be bothered to run their trains on time just for once).

Crossrail might be quicker, but the trains will be less frequent than the
Piccadilly, and people with luggage don't like changing trains. Overall,
the Piccadilly is more convenient, and probably hardly slower end-to-end.

On 09/11/2019 14:05, Roland Perry wrote:

As a regular and seasoned traveller (and also not "destination London"),
you've ruled yourself out of the population under discussion.

I'm always doing things like that, take no notice..!

--
Ria in Aberdeen

[Send address is invalid, use sipsoup at gmail dot com to reply direct]

On 09/11/2019 14:02, Roland Perry wrote:
In message , at 00:01:49 on Sat, 9 Nov
2019, Sammi Gray-Jones remarked:
On 07/11/2019 21:39, Recliner wrote:

Â*Not just central London: Ealing Broadway may be more convenient for
peopleÂ* heading to west London, and people going to the City or
Canary Wharf wouldÂ* be crazy to take HEx rather than Crossrail.

We usually stay close to the Ace Cafe (good grub there) so that's what
we intend to do from now on. Piccadilly to Acton Town, District to
Ealing Broadway, then the 112 bus round to Wembley instead of going
right into Zone 1.

As a regular visitor, you just ruled yourself out of HEx's target market.

Will you be using Crossrail, rather than the tube, in future?

That depends if Crossrail opens any time soon, the underground may well
remain the best option for us to use.

On Sat, 9 Nov 2019 14:33:29 -0000 (UTC)
Recliner wrote:
wrote:
On Sat, 9 Nov 2019 02:18:00 -0000 (UTC)
Recliner wrote:
John Levine wrote:
In article ,
Recliner wrote:
Aside from Hex I suspect the piccadilly line will face a hefty slump in
passengers too given how slow and uncomfortable it is.

Yes, quite likely: for many pax, Crossrail will be the better option. I'm
not one of them, but will be delighted if the Tube trains are less
packed.

Since TfL gets the fare whether you take the Picc or Crossrail,
wouldn't that be their cunning plan to free up more underground
capacity?

I think both are cheap enough that pax will choose between them based on
convenience, not price. It really depends on whether the Piccadilly or
Crossrail routes suit you better.

Oddly enough, the only interchange stations between the Piccadilly and
Crossrail are at Heathrow, so they serve a different set of central London
stations. The Piccadilly then goes on to serve north London, and Crossrail,
the City and east London. So, if you're heading for Padd, Farringdon or
Liverpool St, choose Crossrail; for Kings Cross St Pancras, the Piccadilly.

Even if you're going somewhere in north london on the piccadilly line it
would probably still be considerably quicker to take crossrail and change
in central london twice. As for KX - Farringdon then 1 stop on the met or
thameslink, finsbury park - farringdon then 2 stops on thameslink (if they
can be bothered to run their trains on time just for once).

Crossrail might be quicker, but the trains will be less frequent than the
Piccadilly, and people with luggage don't like changing trains. Overall,
the Piccadilly is more convenient, and probably hardly slower end-to-end.

Well until we see a crossrail timetable there's no way to tell, but having
commuted all the way to hatton cross and back each day for 9 months on that
line I would be very surprised if it was the same end to end. It is utterly
hopeless especially in the rush hour - it literally crawls through west london
and only once past hammersmith does it reach anything approaching a reasonable
speed. And then there'd usually be some pointless delay at Acton. I actually
terminated the contract early because I couldn't stand it any longer, almost
2 hours each way door to door on a bad day (which was most of them).

While you have a point about luggage, a lot of the time in the rush hour there
was often nowhere left for more heathrow bound passengers to put theirs and
they ended up sitting on their cases in the middle of the vestibule.

In message , at 17:09:04 on Sat, 9 Nov
2019, remarked:
Even if you're going somewhere in north london on the piccadilly line it
would probably still be considerably quicker to take crossrail and change
in central london twice. As for KX - Farringdon then 1 stop on the met or
thameslink, finsbury park - farringdon then 2 stops on thameslink (if they
can be bothered to run their trains on time just for once).

Crossrail might be quicker, but the trains will be less frequent than the
Piccadilly, and people with luggage don't like changing trains. Overall,
the Piccadilly is more convenient, and probably hardly slower end-to-end.

Well until we see a crossrail timetable there's no way to tell, but having
commuted all the way to hatton cross and back each day for 9 months on that
line I would be very surprised if it was the same end to end. It is utterly
hopeless especially in the rush hour - it literally crawls through west london
and only once past hammersmith does it reach anything approaching a reasonable
speed. And then there'd usually be some pointless delay at Acton. I actually
terminated the contract early because I couldn't stand it any longer, almost
2 hours each way door to door on a bad day (which was most of them).

While you have a point about luggage, a lot of the time in the rush hour there
was often nowhere left for more heathrow bound passengers to put theirs and
they ended up sitting on their cases in the middle of the vestibule.

I'm forced to agree about the crowding/standing, having taken the
Piccadilly from Kings Cross to Heathrow T4 and back earlier this year.
And not even during a rush hour (it was Saturday mid-morning and
mid-evening). The attraction, rather than using HEx/Connect, was only
having to change trains once, at Kings Cross.
--
Roland Perry

Roland Perry wrote:
In message , at 17:09:04 on Sat, 9 Nov
2019, remarked:
Even if you're going somewhere in north london on the piccadilly line it
would probably still be considerably quicker to take crossrail and change
in central london twice. As for KX - Farringdon then 1 stop on the met or
thameslink, finsbury park - farringdon then 2 stops on thameslink (if they
can be bothered to run their trains on time just for once).

Crossrail might be quicker, but the trains will be less frequent than the
Piccadilly, and people with luggage don't like changing trains. Overall,
the Piccadilly is more convenient, and probably hardly slower end-to-end.

Well until we see a crossrail timetable there's no way to tell, but having
commuted all the way to hatton cross and back each day for 9 months on that
line I would be very surprised if it was the same end to end. It is utterly
hopeless especially in the rush hour - it literally crawls through west london
and only once past hammersmith does it reach anything approaching a reasonable
speed. And then there'd usually be some pointless delay at Acton. I actually
terminated the contract early because I couldn't stand it any longer, almost
2 hours each way door to door on a bad day (which was most of them).

While you have a point about luggage, a lot of the time in the rush hour there
was often nowhere left for more heathrow bound passengers to put theirs and
they ended up sitting on their cases in the middle of the vestibule.

I'm forced to agree about the crowding/standing, having taken the
Piccadilly from Kings Cross to Heathrow T4 and back earlier this year.
And not even during a rush hour (it was Saturday mid-morning and
mid-evening). The attraction, rather than using HEx/Connect, was only
having to change trains once, at Kings Cross.

Exactly. It's an easy, if protracted, journey.

Sammi Gray-Jones wrote:
On 09/11/2019 14:02, Roland Perry wrote:
In message , at 00:01:49 on Sat, 9 Nov
2019, Sammi Gray-Jones remarked:
On 07/11/2019 21:39, Recliner wrote:

Â*Not just central London: Ealing Broadway may be more convenient for
peopleÂ* heading to west London, and people going to the City or
Canary Wharf wouldÂ* be crazy to take HEx rather than Crossrail.

We usually stay close to the Ace Cafe (good grub there) so that's what
we intend to do from now on. Piccadilly to Acton Town, District to
Ealing Broadway, then the 112 bus round to Wembley instead of going
right into Zone 1.

As a regular visitor, you just ruled yourself out of HEx's target market.

Will you be using Crossrail, rather than the tube, in future?

That depends if Crossrail opens any time soon, the underground may well
remain the best option for us to use.

That bit of Crossrail is already open, albeit with a lower frequency than
planned for the future.

In message , at 21:30:43 on Fri, 8 Nov 2019,
John Levine remarked:
In article ,
Roland Perry wrote:
It's vital to your thesis because HEx is catering for the high-end
airline passenger who has probably never visited London before, and just
wants to be spoon-fed an "airport express" service to the city centre.

If you say so, but it's hard to believe their business model assumed
that each passenger will make one trip in his lifetime.

Their business model was primarily high-end passengers who would
otherwise have taken a taxi door to door. But as it's traditional in
this group for people to be in denial about that, it becomes necessary
to look at the next layer in the demographic, and look at "why people
choose HEx rather than commuter services". And that's because they are
novices at travelling in London and the rule of thumb in big cities for
the uninitiated is "commuter services are a nightmare, catch the airport
express instead".

It's also why such people also choose to stay in familiar international
chains of hotels, rather than seek out privately-run local alternatives,
but I digress.

I cheerfully agree that if your destination is near Paddington, HeX is
quite handy,

For the people in HEx's target market (both of the two above), it's
irrelevant where Paddington is, it's simply a railhead with a taxi-rank
that's (to use London terminology) 'inside Zone 1'.

particularly if you or your travel planner are able to think a few
days ahead and book a £15 fixed date return HeX ticket.

Given the other costs of the trip - flight, hotels, and yes the taxi
from Paddington to their ultimate destination - they they think they've
done that task by identifying HEx as the quicker/cheaper[even at rack
rate] way to get to Zone 1, than a taxi starting from Heathrow.

They don't need to airbrush out HEx, and then see what the next more
gruesome option is.

Here in the US, the normal thing at an airport is to rent a car, not
to take a taxi.

I think that's a huge stretch for the kind of travellers involved. For
example the first time I flew into Atlanta from the UK for a trade show
in the city centre, a hire car would be a huge liability. As would one
have been to a similar trade show six months later in New York.

If you're just going to downtown Atlanta or anywhere in NYC you're
right, a car is a bad idea. But they are not typical of US cities or
airports. I have visted a friend who lives on the Emory campus at the
north edge of Atlanta. You can get there on MARTA and a bus, but it's
quite slow. A taxi is quite expensive since it takes hour with
traffic, and you'll typically want a car at your destination anyway
since restaurants and such are rarely within walking distance.

But we are discussing coming to London, not to cities in the USA.
--
Roland Perry