This is topic What is London like in January? in forum Film-Yak at Film-Tech Forum ARCHIVE.
To visit this topic, use this URL:
https://ft-forum.com/ft/cgi-bin/ubb/ultimatebb.cgi?ubb=get_topic;f=8;t=005040
Posted by Claude S. Ayakawa (Member # 1401) on 04-15-2007, 03:18 AM:
I have been invited to be a speaker at a professional photographers convention in London in mid January next year and was wondering what is it like at that time of the year in that city? How cold will it be and what kind of weather can I expect? I intend to fly to London from either Los Angeles or San Francisco after flying from Honolulu on United Airlines and would like to know the flight time to London from the US west coast and back again. I was told it is a very long flight and even longer on the way back. My hosts will be covering all traveling expenses including lodging and some expenses during most of the time I will be there and I do intend to have a good time because this will be my first European trip.
-Claude
Posted by Michael Coate (Member # 757) on 04-15-2007, 03:43 AM:
quote: Claude S. Ayakawa
How cold will it be and what kind of weather can I expect?
Colder than Hawaii. ![[Big Grin]](biggrin.gif)
quote: Claude S. Ayakawa
I intend to fly to London from either Los Angeles or San Francisco after flying from Honolulu on United Airlines and would like to know the flight time to London from the US west coast and back again. I was told it is a very long flight and even longer on the way back.
If non-stop, about nine hours or so getting there. As for the return, typically east-to-west trans-Atlantic flights are about an hour longer than their west-to-east counterpart flight.
Posted by Claude S. Ayakawa (Member # 1401) on 04-15-2007, 03:57 AM:
Michael,
My non stop flight to London from San Francisco or Los Angeles and back will not be Trans Atlantic but will be the polar route and I understand it will be much longer than nine hours.
-Claude
Posted by Stephen Furley (Member # 1277) on 04-15-2007, 04:30 AM:
Claude,
It's really not possible to say what the weather will be like, it varies so much. Very severe winters are unusual, though they do happen, 1963 was one I remember, and there was another maybe 15-20 years ago.
At worst, daytime temperatures are likely to be from a few degrees below freezing, to quite comfortable, though you probably wouldn't want to go out without a coat. When the sky is clear temperatures tend to drop quite rapidly after sunset. Temperatures below freezing are quite likely overnight We don't get a lot of snow here, but it's more likely in January than in any other month; snow before, or during, Christmas is unusual. A small amount of snow does seem to cause more disruption here than in other countries.
I don't know about the flight time; London to New York takes about seven hours, returning East getting on for an hour less, so you are talking about a long flight whichever way round you go; I would guess that you're looking at something like an 11 hour flight.
Will you be hiring a car or using public transport, and which airport will you be arriving at; what part of London will you be staying in?
One thing you should be prepared for, London is very expensive, most things seem to cost about twice as much as they do in New York.
Posted by Michael Coate (Member # 757) on 04-15-2007, 04:39 AM:
quote: Claude S. Ayakawa
My non stop flight to London from San Francisco or Los Angeles and back will not be Trans Atlantic but will be the polar route and I understand it will be much longer than nine hours.
I believe it is still considered a trans-Atlantic flight.
Regardless, why should the so-called Polar Route take longer? The Polar Route is precisely why it won't take much longer than the duration you've been told.
I've flown to and from Europe eight times in my life. A couple of them were non-stop, and my recollection is that Los Angeles to Frankfurt was ten hours, and Frankfurt to Los Angeles was eleven. Considering the Polar Route, it would appear that L.A. to London is a shorter distance than L.A. to Frankfurt (but not by much), and if you fly out of San Francisco it would be even shorter.
I've never flown to London directly from L.A. The last time I flew to London, I went L.A. to Vancouver and then Vancouver to London, the duration being 2 1/2 or 3 hours to Vancouver and then I think seven to London.
I'd also like to add that during that Vancouver to London flight, I experienced something that I thought was pretty cool: pitch black looking out one side of the plane, and daylight out the other side. (This was a night flight during the month of July.)
[ 04-15-2007, 11:10 PM: Message edited by: Michael Coate ]
Posted by Leo Enticknap (Member # 534) on 04-15-2007, 07:56 AM:
Flight times vary significantly according to the weather and routing. Atlantic flights typically take a 'Great Circle' routing (here is San Francisco to London Heathrow), to take advantage of the smaller curve of the earth the further north you go from the Equator, which reduces the overall distance. I do Amsterdam to Minneapolis and back two or three times a year: the westbound flight typically takes between 8h and 9h, while the return journey is usually between 7h15 and 8h15. I think the Eastbound flights are quicker because the Gulf Stream gives you a headwind - I'm sure Paul Mayer could explain the technicalities of this, if he's lurking anywhere nearby. I've never done a Europe to West Coast in one hop, but understand that, very roughly, it's 9-10 hours eastbound and 10-11 westbound.
Agreed completely with Stephen about the cost of living in ripoff Britain. The cost of most consumer goods and services here is about the same in pounds as it is in the US in dollars, but the exchange rate is around $1.90 to the pound.
Posted by Dick Vaughan (Member # 540) on 04-15-2007, 09:59 AM:
Claude
I have done the London to LA direct flights quite often. Eastbound is usually around 10 hours and just over 11 Westbound.
Posted by Ian Price (Member # 14) on 04-15-2007, 10:31 AM:
Just wondering, would a Honolulu-Seattle-London flight be shorter? Would a Honolulu-Anchorage-London be shorter still? The longest U.S. route would be Honolulu-L.A.-Miami-London.
But L.A. or San Francisco makes Sense due to the numerous flights to London.
London at 50 degrees will seem colder than Denver at 50 degrees. Plus you spend more time outside walking to the Underground or hailing a cab than you do in the States climbing from your air-conditioned home, to your attached garage, to your air-conditioned car, to your air-conditioned house.
Posted by Leo Enticknap (Member # 534) on 04-15-2007, 10:52 AM:
There are no direct flights from Anchorage to Europe that I could find. When I visited Anchorage last October the only way of doing it was via the major US airlines' lower 48 hubs. I went on Northwest via Minneapolis (MSP to ANC is 6-7 hours), because NW/KLM is the only airline which offers through international tickets from the most convenient airport to where I live (Teesside) apart from Shitish Airways (oops, Freudian slip). If you start at a little English regional airport, the ticket for an intercontinental trip typically costs £50-100 more than if you made your own way to the nearest big hub (which in my case would be Manchester), but it'll cost you that (if not more) to get there and spend the night before flying in a hotel if necessary, so I find that including the MME-AMS hop into the ticket actually saves money and hassle in the long run.
Attempting to transfer through London Heathrow is a nightmare - for example, they won't check your hold luggage through if you're transferring between terminals - and well worth an extra hour on the timetabled journey time to avoid. Amsterdam Schiphol is all one terminal under one roof - very easy and stress-free for transfers.
Like Ian said, you'll be using public transport almost exclusively in downtown (central) London. Once you've got over the shock of how much it costs to hire a car and put petrol (gasoline) in it, you have to pay an £8 per day 'congestion charge' to drive a car within the central area, and unless your hotel includes parking as part of the room rate, expect to pay £20-30 to park.
Most places are within 30 minutes walk of each other, and if you'd prefer not to walk, the Tube (nickname for subway - it's officially called the Underground) and bus networks are extensive - they cover almost everywhere in the city and immediate suburbs you're likely to want to visit - and are reasonably reliable. But, like everything in Britain, they ain't cheap. On a recent visit to stay with a friend, I paid £4 (about $7.50) one-way from London City Airport to Russell Square: this compares with the $2 I paid last week on the 'T' from Logan Airport to Copley Square in Boston!
quote: Stephen Furley
Very severe winters are unusual, though they do happen, 1963 was one I remember, and there was another maybe 15-20 years ago.
1991-92 sticks in my memory, which was the last winter I lived in London. The journey from my home in Wimbledon to the sixth form college near Hampton Court involved a mile-long walk across a golf course from Esher station, and I remember it being snow covered for two to three weeks in succession. The winter of 1995-96 was also pretty harsh: I was living in Norwich at the time, and remember that you'd wake up to see snow on the ground for weeks rather than days. But there hasn't been anything like those two winters in the decade since.
Edited to answer Stephen's point about cold winters.
[ 04-15-2007, 01:37 PM: Message edited by: Leo Enticknap ]
Posted by Claude S. Ayakawa (Member # 1401) on 04-16-2007, 01:11 AM:
Thank you everyone for your most useful information. Stephen, I will be staying at the Novotel in the Hammersmith district of London and I understand it is about ten miles from Heathrow International Airport and near your subway stations. No, I will not be renting a car or have any intention of driving but I might do a lot of walking if it is not too cold outside. I did a lot of walking in Tokyo once and hope I do not get lost like I did in the Japanese capitol. Even if the flight to London is about ten to eleven hours long from the west coast, I would have been in the air almost five hours when I fly to the coast from Hawaii. When you add the connection time on the ground, it will take me almost twenty hours to get to London While in London, I would like to see most of the famous sites of the city and might buy a bus tour ticket if I can find the time after I am finished presenting my convention program. One of the things I would like to do if possible is to see if I can purchase classical music CDs in London that are not available in the US and was wondering how expensive are they compared to the US.
-Claude
Posted by Michael Schaffer (Member # 1204) on 04-16-2007, 01:22 AM:
That kind of CDs costs more or less the same everywhere. That's why we don't but them in stores anymore. We buy them online. Online stores like amazon.com often have good deals, you can find many CDs new for much less than the typical list price, or used in very good condition, often for a ridiculously low price. I have no idea if shipping to Hawaii adds substantially to the costs though. You can also get a lot of classical CDs for very good prices (including many titles which are out of print in the Western World) from hmv.co.jp and other online sellers in Japan. They have an English version of their webpage. The nice thing is that shipping costs aren't that high at all, and if you order several items, the overall shipping cost per item goes down (unlike many online stores which charge you standard shipping rates even if you order several items at once). Again, I have no idea if the shipping costs to Hawaii are different from those to the continental US (they might even be less), but in general, hmv.co.jp has fair rates and the shipping is amazingly fast. I had a package here once within 4 days (!) - that was their standard shipping, not an upgrade.
What you can do in London is go to live concerts. The "classical" scene there is incredible. They have several top class orchestras (London Symphony, London Philharmonic, Philharmonia, Royal Philharmonic, BBC Symphony) and dozens of freelance ensembles, including several which play on historical instruments, plus orchestras typically stop by in London when they are on tour, and orchestras from other parts of the UK visit the capital regularly to present themselves. So there are tons of concerts going on everywhere all the time, at the Barbican Centre, at the Royal Festival Hall and in many other venues. I think London has the liveliest "classical" scene in the world, apart from Berlin.
Posted by Frank Dubrois (Member # 3042) on 04-16-2007, 01:40 AM:
I wish I could go someday. Other than Italy, England would be my choice. I just hate planes, so I don't see myself going there anytime soon.
Posted by Claude S. Ayakawa (Member # 1401) on 04-16-2007, 02:01 AM:
Michael,
Because of my semi retired status, I do not buy too many CDs like I used to because of a tight budget I have set for myself for non essential things but I do buy some from my BMG membership using mail order. I have also purchased a few from Amazon and you are right, they are very reasonably priced.
I love live music and used to be a season subscriber to the Honolulu Symphony and the Hawaii Opera Theatre for years. During those years, I got to see many great artist and even modern day composers who have since passed on includig Aram khachaturian, Igor Stranvinsky and Aaron Copland when they appeared with our orchestra. I also attended concerts by the Vienna Philharmonic with Herbert Von Karajan and the New York Philharmonic under Leonard Bernstein when they came to Honolulu on tour. It would be nice to see and hear the many great European orchestras you had mentioned but sadly, lack of time will prevent me from seeing them when I am in London.
-Claude
Posted by Leo Enticknap (Member # 534) on 04-16-2007, 06:30 AM:
Hammersmith is about half way between Heathrow and the city centre: a 20-30 minute tube ride from Central London, and about the same from Heathrow (in the opposite direction). You should have no problem (apart from the cost) with buses and tubes from Hammersmith to wherever you're trying to get to within London.
Agreed with Michael that you're unlikely to find many CDs that aren't available in the US and/or through Amazon, but you probably will find DVDs of European films that aren't published or readily available in the US. They'll be PAL and Region 2, though, so only buy if you have a multi-region player, plus a TV that can accept a PAL signal or a DVD player which fully converts the picture to NTSC.
Posted by Stephen Furley (Member # 1277) on 04-16-2007, 12:00 PM:
quote: Claude S. Ayakawa
I will be staying at the Novotel in the Hammersmith district of London and I understand it is about ten miles from Heathrow International Airport and near your subway stations. No, I will not be renting a car or have any intention of driving but I might do a lot of walking if it is not too cold outside.
Avoiding driving is something I would recommend. The traffic in London can be pretty bad, and driving in a country you're not familiar with is something that demands a lot of concentration, you can't really look at anything of interest while you're driving. Something important if you're walking, remember that traffic drives on the left here; when I went to America I found it very difficult to get used to this, and to look in the right direction for approaching traffic.
Hammersmith is served directly from Heathrow by the Underground, it's on the Piccadilly line, the dark blue one on the map. Transport for London have a website at www.tfl.gov.uk, and maps and a journey planner are available at this page: web page . If you download the Tube Map and look at it, Heathrow is on the dark blue loop near the bottom left, and if you follow this line to the point where the pink Hammersmith & City line almost meets it, that is Hammersmith. The Journey Planner gives thirty minutes for this journey, which sounds about right. If you don't want to use the Underground, then I would suggest taking a taxi; I don't know what that would cost, I haven't used one for years. I wouldn't recommend the bus; there isn't a direct route, you would need to take either two or three buses, depending on which route you took; not really a good itea in a unfamiliar city, and when carrying luggage. There is now a main-line railway from Heathrow, but it goes to central London and doesn't serve Hammersmith, so it's not much use to you. It's also very expensive.
For travelling around London generally the buses are quite good; many of them are double-deckers, and you get a good view from the top deck. Try to avoid travelling in Central London at peak times, about 7-9 am and 4-6 pm if you can; just about any means of transport will be very crowded, and not very pleasant, at these times.
There are several companies who offer guided walks around parts of London; this one London Walks has been around for many years, and is good.
quote: Claude S. Ayakawa
It would be nice to see and hear the many great European orchestras you had mentioned but sadly, lack of time will prevent me from seeing them when I am in London.
If you're coming all that way, can't you arrange to stay for a few extra days?
Posted by Mark Ogden (Member # 43) on 04-16-2007, 01:54 PM:
Just to try to be helpful, I went to Google to find out alternate ways of getting to London from Los Angeles. Try it: go to Google, click Maps, then click directions, then enter Los Angeles in the "FROM" box and London in the "TO" box.
It all sounds great, until you get to step #30 . . .
Posted by Nate Lehrke (Member # 1460) on 04-16-2007, 02:02 PM:
I was just in London from Jan 10th to the 22nd.
It was about 50 everyday, rainy and WAY WINDY.
Overall though I thought the weather was awesome because no-one wanted to be out. I found getting around alot easier.
Posted by Leo Enticknap (Member # 534) on 04-16-2007, 02:40 PM:
Yup, I remember that week ... got blown clean into the road in Leeds. The fact that there weren't any cars in the way cost me one of my nine lives, for sure.
quote: Stephen Furley
If you don't want to use the Underground, then I would suggest taking a taxi; I don't know what that would cost, I haven't used one for years.
You won't get much change out of £50 from Heathrow to Central London - probably somewhere between £20-30 for Hammersmith. About a year ago I had a London meeting I really wanted to avoid and was virtually forced to go to at gunpoint. Normally I wouldn't dream of cabbing it from Heathrow, especially when I only have a small laptop & papers bag with me. But I'm afraid the desire for revenge overtook me, so I got a cab from Terminal 1 to Soho Square and stuck it on expenses with a note on the form saying that a late flight made public transport impractical. That was kind of true, but I don't think the taxi was significantly quicker (it took around 45 minutes).
Posted by Michael Schaffer (Member # 1204) on 04-16-2007, 02:59 PM:
quote: Stephen Furley
Something important if you're walking, remember that traffic drives on the left here; when I went to America I found it very difficult to get used to this, and to look in the right direction for approaching traffic.
But Stephen, we should look in *both* directions anyway when we cross a street, no matter where we are.
quote: Mark Ogden
Just to try to be helpful, I went to Google to find out alternate ways of getting to London from Los Angeles. Try it: go to Google, click Maps, then click directions, then enter Los Angeles in the "FROM" box and London in the "TO" box.
It all sounds great, until you get to step #30 . . .
Pretty funny actually:
Posted by Mark Gulbrandsen (Member # 72) on 04-16-2007, 03:06 PM:
quote: Claude S. Ayakawa
will be the polar route
Don't forget the Dog Sled, fur coat, and "Making An Igloo In Six Easy Steps" in case the plane has difficulties.
Mark
Posted by John Wilson (Member # 269) on 04-16-2007, 04:04 PM:
Hey, the Goooooooooooogle guys have a sense of humour!
Posted by Stephen Furley (Member # 1277) on 04-16-2007, 04:19 PM:
quote: Michael Schaffer
But Stephen, we should look in *both* directions anyway when we cross a street, no matter where we are.
My hotel is only a couple of minutes walk from the PATH station at Journal Square, but that walk involves crossing a very wide road, about four lanes in each direction I think it was, with a fefuge island in the middle, so it was in effect, two uni-directional roads. I found it really difficult to concentrate on looking for traffic coming from the direction which it was for the half of the road that I was crossing at the time; something inside me just kept wanting to look the other way. It took several days to get used to it.
[ 04-17-2007, 06:27 AM: Message edited by: Stephen Furley ]
Posted by Leo Enticknap (Member # 534) on 04-16-2007, 04:40 PM:
Me too. Add to that the fact that America doesn't do roundabouts (or at least, the bits of it I've visited don't) - just very large crossroads and T-junctions - and allows vehicles to turn right against a red light - so it's not completely safe to cross the road even if the 'walk' symbol is illuminated - and during the first few days of a visit I'd much rather wait 3-4 minutes before attempting to cross than take a risk.
And of course, just as I'm getting used to American traffic conventions, it's time to go home again...
Posted by Michael Schaffer (Member # 1204) on 04-16-2007, 07:20 PM:
The one thing that did take me a while to get used to here is that on the freeway, you have a lot of people driving slow in the middle and left lanes, and people often change lanes apparently randomly, often without using the turn signal.
In Germany, as you probably know, there is no general speed limit on the freeway ("Autobahn"), although there are many areas where speed limits are posted. E.g. stretches with a lot of curves, bad road surface, construction etc. But there is one very iron rule that applies everywhere, that you have to drive on the right side and pass on the left. It is absolutely forbidden to pass on the right of another vehicle, if they catch you doing that, you get a ticket. More painful than a ticket, the offender also gets several points in the central traffic offence registry (if you have collected a certain number of points, they automatically suspend your license or take it away). The same now applies to driving slow on the left. So the police can also pull you over and give you a ticket if you drive at the same speed or slower than other vehicles to your right. Also, changing lanes without using the turn signal is seen as a serious offence. Because studies have shown that it is not so the absolute speed which causes accidents, but rather the degree of organizedness (or lack thereof) of the traffic flow. Although if you drive very fast (over 130km/h which is about 80mph), you automatically get part of the blame if you get into an accident as they say that absolute control over the vehicle and situations you can get into is diminished at high speeds. Still, you have a lot of people rocketing down the Autobahn in their BMWs, Mercedes', Porsches, Audis etc. Since the auto industry is one of the biggst industries in Germany (the biggest?), they have a very strong lobby, kind of like the gun industry in the US, and they also use the same kind of slogans against speed limits ("free driving for free citizens!").
Posted by Caleb Johnstone-Cowan (Member # 3710) on 04-16-2007, 09:08 PM:
I know Hammersmith well, went to college (last two years of high school for you guys) there. The Novotel is about 5 minutes from the Underground stations (there are two), and a minute from my birthplace (the hospital is now HQ for SonyEricsson!).
The Riverside Studios in Hammersmith is the best cinema in London, about £6 for double bills, can take alcohol in, and the programming is far more varied and interesting than anywhere else, although it was better a few years ago.
Unless you have several bags I'd get the underground to Hammersmith. The cab journey is quicker than the tube outside rush hour, pretty much a motorway door to door, but you will pay ten times more. Personally think that in London both black cabs and mini cabs will always try to rip you off.
For public transport, you need an Oyster smart card to avoid paying the cash fares which are double the price. It is a £3 returnable deposit and you apply for one at the Underground ticket office, where you can put money on it. Have a look on the TfL website mentioned above.
For classsical music CDs, I know that the HMV store on Oxford Street has an large section downstairs that is seperated from the rest of the store, have their own specialist staff I think.
Ask for the local cycle guide at Hammersmith Underground station. Might sound odd, but they provide a free and pretty detailed map of the area and of Central London.
It takes me two or three days to get used to cars driving on the other side in Europe. Trams are the worst, have nearly been hit by them in Amsterdam and Leipzig!
Posted by Michael Coate (Member # 757) on 04-16-2007, 09:11 PM:
quote: Leo Enticknap
Add to that the fact that America doesn't do roundabouts
That's because we've seen Chevy Chase try to navigate through one in "European Vacation"!
Posted by Leo Enticknap (Member # 534) on 04-17-2007, 01:18 AM:
quote: Michael Schaffer
But there is one very iron rule that applies everywhere, that you have to drive on the right side and pass on the left. It is absolutely forbidden to pass on the right of another vehicle, if they catch you doing that, you get a ticket.
Interesting. The same rules apply in theory in Britain too - drive on the nearside, move to an offside lane only to overtake, then move straight back again, and always indicate in good time before changing lanes (and throughout the manouvre itself). But these are almost univerally ignored and virtually never enforced. Weaving between lanes without indicating, 'middle lane hogs' and aggressive tailgating are all standard behaviour on British motorways. Sadly, the 'speed kills' mantra is the only one our government seems willing to listen to, and their policy is based on the premise that if you drive at 69mph with bald tyres, loud music blaring and two inches behind the vehicle in front you're safe, but if you're doing 71 in a well maintained vehicle and leaving 100 yards between you and the car in front, you're a menace to society and must be punished. We've got one of the highest motorway accident death tolls per passenger mile traveled in Europe (only France is worse, from the last figures I saw), and yet the only answer the powers that be seem to have is to reduce the motorway speed limits further (which are also among the lowest in Europe as things are).
Posted by Michael Schaffer (Member # 1204) on 04-17-2007, 05:40 AM:
Can you link to some of those statistics? That would be interesting to see. I googled that, but there were too many inconclusive hits. The problem is that the factors which contribute to accidents are so complex, I think statistics can be tailored to "reflect" many things. But "deaths per miles traveled" or similar seems like an approach that makes sense to me.
Posted by Leo Enticknap (Member # 534) on 04-17-2007, 02:28 PM:
I can't, sorry. It was one of those Sunday paper feature articles you only read if you're killing time on a plane or train. I had a brief search on the Telegraph's website (that's the only paper I'm actually willing to pay money for, though I may have picked up another which someone abandoned in a departure lounge or something) The gist of it is that if you want to get yourself killed by a moron driver, head for France or Britain (unless I'm misremembering, there really wasn't much in it between them); if you want to drive from A to B safely and without stress, go anywhere else in Western Europe.
Posted by Joel N. Weber II (Member # 3530) on 04-17-2007, 09:05 PM:
quote: Leo Enticknap
Add to that the fact that America doesn't do roundabouts (or at least, the bits of it I've visited don't) - just very large crossroads and T-junctions
Wikipedia's roundabout entry says:
quote:
In Massachusetts, rotaries are nearly always built to the standards of a British roundabout, and a "roundabout" refers to an especially small rotary with crosswalks, between high-traffic roads.
But the vast majority of intersections in Massachusetts are not rotaries, probably even between high traffic roads.
quote: Leo Enticknap
and allows vehicles to turn right against a red light - so it's not completely safe to cross the road even if the 'walk' symbol is illuminated
Except that some intersections have ``No turn on red'' signs posted.
Also, right turn on red is not the only case where thoughtlessly obeying walk signals is dangerous; at some intersections, the walk signal is given at nearly the same time as the green light, such that all right turns are potential conflicts.
I believe that. at least in Masachusetts, if you are making a left turn from a one way street to a one way street, that a left turn on red is legal. If you are exiting Davis Square in Somerville, MA trying to get onto Highland Ave as soon as possible, you end up going through an intersection where this is possible as you turn off Summer Street.
How to safely be a pedestrian also varies somewhat from one city to another. I took an MBTA Commuter Rail train to Providence last month, and found that Providence drivers seem to be somewhat less aware of pedestrians that Boston drivers.
Posted by Leo Enticknap (Member # 534) on 04-18-2007, 02:43 AM:
Interesting: I was in Boston for a few days just before Easter and didn't spot any roundabouts. Agreed that motorists tended to be more tolerant of pedestrians making mistakes, though. Could this be because the combination of Boston/Cambridge having a relatively good public transport system (I'd say it was the most extensive and most reliable of any US city I've visited, though I haven't been to New York or Washington DC) and the Big Dig putting major roads underground has encouraged more people to walk around the downtown area?
The traffic signal conventions are still a major culture shock for me, though: in Britain, motorists must never go through a red light under any circumstances whatsoever, even if no-one is anywhere near the pedestrian crossing and there is no opposing traffic. Even if it's 5 in the morning on a deserted road, you've still got to stop. That's one of the few road traffic laws that drivers here actually tend to obey!
Posted by Steve Guttag (Member # 268) on 04-18-2007, 06:48 AM:
The fact that Washington DC's mass transit is not 24-hours a day disqualifies it from being a truely useful system for the masses. It is primarily geared towards the 9-5 person working in DC...to which they charge a preminum for using it in peak times.
For mass transit to really be effective...you can't worry about if you will catch the last train to get home. You should be able to come and go as you need. This peak fare thing also discourages people from using it when they should. If a private business is trying to encourage business, they lower rates, not raise them. The cheaper they make mass transit and if they had 24-hour service, the more people would use it.
NYCs subway seems to get you anywhere at any time...in that respect, it is far better than DCs.
Posted by Scott Norwood (Member # 30) on 04-18-2007, 07:42 AM:
The MBTA is also not 24/7. ![[Frown]](frown.gif)
Service is generally reliable, but the upkeep of the stations and trains/buses leaves much to be desired. They recently replaced tokens with fare cards (and increased fares shortly thereafter). The new fare card machines have what is probably the worst user interface that one might imagine. This was not an upgrade. There are some interesting historical points of interest on the MBTA, particularly the PCC cars that are still in use (well, they're out of service right now, but should be returning this summer) on the Mattpan extension of the Red Line.
As much as the Washington Post likes to complain about the Metro in DC, I've always been impressed with the system. It runs on time, is clean and well maintained, and the stations are (generally) conveniently located. I agree that their fares are high and don't make sense (different charges by time of day and by distance traveled), but at least their fare card system seems to work well.
NYC and London have significantly better public transportation systems than either Boston or DC (though I heard that they recently discontinued use of the standard London bus).
Posted by Stephen Furley (Member # 1277) on 04-18-2007, 08:13 AM:
quote: Scott Norwood
NYC and London have significantly better public transportation systems than either Boston or DC (though I heard that they recently discontinued use of the standard London bus).
That would be the Routemaster; they were built from 1954 to 1967, I think.
web page with picture.
They hadn't really been the standard for many years, as there were only a small number of them that were still operating on a few routes. There are actually a very small number still operating on two short routes for tourists.
To be honest, it was time to phase out the last of them, a process which had been going on for a long time, I remember using one of the first replacements for them, the Daimler 'Fleetline' to get to school, in about 1971. The Fleetlines were all gone within a few years, but the Routemasters just carried on. That's the problem; the Routemaster was a very good 1950's bus, but the many different models which we have seen since have generally been mediocre to downright terrible 1970s to 2000s ones. What we really need is a very good modern bus.
Posted by Joel N. Weber II (Member # 3530) on 04-19-2007, 09:03 PM:
I'm not entirely convinced the new MBTA fare collection system is all that bad. I don't have to take anything out of my pocket as I'm going through the fare gates to board a train. (Unfortunately, the readers on the buses are mounted too high for that trick to work on the buses.)
The fare restructuring has its ups and downs. Last year, I was paying $44/month for a subway pass; this year, I'm paying $59/mo for a ``link pass'' that covers the buses and the subways, and includes some of the farther subway stations that weren't covered by my old pass.
On December 29 2006, I happened to be in Quincy, and someone was giving me a ride back to one of the nearest T stations, and we picked a station based on which one my pass was going to work at; under the new system that took effect a few days later, that wouldn't be a consideration.
The other effect of the new fare structure is that, since I've already paid for it, I'm much more likely to catch a bus if I see one going in the same direction I'm walking. Digging three quarters, a nickle, and a dime out of my pocket generally seemed more annoying than walking another ten minutes. It seems to me that this sort of thing ought to increase ridership which ought to be able to justify more frequent service which ought to be able to further increase ridership.
Another interesting thing to note is that for the pople who used to buy combo passes, the cost went down under the new system. People who commute by train + bus already have a longer commute than those who are lucky enough to be able to just take the train; why should those with the painful commute be further penalized by being required to pay extra?
The Big Dig is relatively recent, and I doubt it's had much effect on pedestrian habits. But then again, I spend a lot more time in Cambridge/Somerville than Boston proper, and I'm not sure Cambridge/Somerville were directly affected by the big dig.
If you start at the Alewife T station and drive down Alewife Brook Parkway in the general direction towards Harvard Square, you'll encounter at least two rotaries. But that's the only example of a rotaries that comes to mind that I can clearly place.
I'm not sure it's pedestrian mistakes per se that drivers tolerate. I'm pretty sure there are some unwritten rules that everyone subconciously respects. One of the things I learned shortly after moving to Boston was how to use body language to tell drivers that I wasn't going to jaywalk in front of them (since often it seems far more efficient to just let the fast-moving vehicle keep going).
Posted by John Wilson (Member # 269) on 04-20-2007, 03:10 AM:
quote: Caleb Johnstone-Cowan
The Riverside Studios in Hammersmith is the best cinema in London, about £6 for double bills, can take alcohol in, and the programming is far more varied and interesting than anywhere else, although it was better a few years ago.
I projected there for several months back in 1993. Great programming. Would imagine DVD has removed a lot of its audience though as it was mostly rep stuff we ran. Also worked at the Electric in Portobello Road, Notting Hill. I hear it's been tarted up since with lounge chairs and even a bar inside the theatre. The guys running it in 1993 were useless morons. It must have changed hands as they would never have had the brains to make it actually work.
Posted by Bernard Tonks (Member # 809) on 04-20-2007, 11:52 AM:
John,
I remember seeing your picture in a newspaper at the Electric operating a pair of Victoria 5's. Since then the cinema changed hands many times, and closed. I hear it is very succesful now, and does a lot of previews and premieres along with the first run releases. Seems strange that they removed the Vic 5's for a single Kinoton 35mm projector and Westrex Tower. It must be hard going for the projection staff without a 2nd machine with all the extra screenings.
Back in 1970 I helped remove the old clapped out BTH projectors and install Simplex with RCA sound which I bought from Fox for £400, previously used in Sir Winston Churchill's private cinema at his Chartwell home. I also tried very hard to get the wall removed into the rewind room to improve the size of the projection room without success.
http://www.electriccinema.co.uk/
Posted by Claude S. Ayakawa (Member # 1401) on 04-21-2007, 01:56 AM:
Getting back to my topic reagrding information I need regarding my trip to London next January, Is is true a room will cost about $350.00 a night at most hotels in the city? My hosts will be picking up the charges for three night of lodging but I am thinking about staying two extra nights and if rooms go for over three hundred dollars per day, it will cost me about $700.00 just for a room to sleep that extra time I will be in London. If this is true, London is truly a rip off city. Rooms here in Hawaii averages about $150.00 and even less at some Waikiki Hotel. Most four to five stars hotel here do charge over $350.00 but to have to pay a little over $300.00 for a standard hotel room is absurd. If a hotel room cost over $300.00, how much does a good meal cost in a average restaurant and how much are first run movies in good theatres? If I do have the time for a movie during my stay, How far away is the Riverside Theatre in Hammersmith from the hotel I will be staying?
-Claude
Posted by Leo Enticknap (Member # 534) on 04-21-2007, 08:55 AM:
I don't know about the specific hotel in Hammersmith you mentioned, but a reasonable hotel room in Central (downtown - you won't see that word used in Britain) London can be had for £80-90 ($160-180) a night. For that sort of price you'll get a room with a perfectly reasonable bed, TV, en suite shower and loo, within 20-30 minutes' walk of all the main central business district and tourist locations. For the $350 (£170-80) a night mark, I'd expect lots of extras. I've never stayed in rooms at that sort of price so I wouldn't know exactly what to expect, but things I might expect would include a location right in the heart of the city (e.g. just off Charing Cross Road rather than in Bloomsbury), air conditioning, car parking, inclusive meals etc.
If you want to extend your stay on a budget, looking 5-10 miles out into the suburbs might save you a bit of money. My mother lives in Wimbledon (9 miles south-west of Trafalgar Square), and while she was in the process of moving house 6 years ago I stayed in a hotel there for one night for £52 ($105 ish). Prices will have gone up a bit since then but I'd guess that you could find a perfectly decent room for not too much more than $100 if you're prepared to look around online. If you stick to the south or south-west of the city, you'll be with in easy reach of Heathrow, and it's only 40-50 minutes on the tube to the city centre.
All that having been said, I'm afraid to say that 'ripoff Britain' is a reality, and with the £1=$2 barrier just having been busted, the cost of living here must now be a major disincentive for people who earn their salary in dollars to visit the UK on vacation. It is possible to keep the cost of eating, traveling and seeing interesting stuff in London reasonably sane, but it needs planning and thinking about in advance - which, of course, is exactly what you don't want to have to be worrying about when you're on a break.
Posted by Caleb Johnstone-Cowan (Member # 3710) on 04-21-2007, 07:54 PM:
quote: John Wilson
Would imagine DVD has removed a lot of its audience though as it was mostly rep stuff we ran.
Think its still rep but has moved more into second-run as opposed to 'classics'. I've seen it rammed for Kurosawa, but dead for other stuff.
The Electric seems like a nice cinema, but I'm always wary of places like it. They always appear to be holier than thou as do the patrons. Also for the about same price I can get my Unlimited Card which is as many films as I want in a month, or I can go to the Empire which is another league in terms of presentation.
From the Novotel the Riverside Studios is 5-10mins walk. I'd give you precise directions but have no idea which road the entrance to the hotel is on.
In London a first run film will range from $12 in the suburbs to $36 for the best seats at Odeon Leicester Square. With restaurants you can pay a few pounds, or thousands. I've had very good meals with drink for $50 a head.
I reckon you should be able to get an decent but basic hotel for $150 a night. Or less, for example:
Travelodge Covent Garden
It's a very good location.
Posted by Claude S. Ayakawa (Member # 1401) on 06-29-2007, 01:49 AM:
When I asked my hosts if anyone will be coming for me when I arrive in London in January, the answer was 'No'. They told me it will be easy if I used the subway or a cab. I must admit I am not too happy with the idea if toting a suitcase, garment bag and my laptop computer case on a subway or a cab in a foreign city I know nothing about and using a monetary system I am not accustomed.
I am afraid if I cannot get them to agree that I should be met and receive a send off when it is time to leave, I am thinking about canceling the trip and stay home.
By the way, how much will the cab fare be to the Novotel at Hammersmith from the airport?
-Claude
Posted by Michael Schaffer (Member # 1204) on 06-29-2007, 05:20 AM:
I would say about £230-250.
Posted by Stephen Furley (Member # 1277) on 06-29-2007, 05:53 AM:
Claude,
I don't know what the cab fare would be, because I never use them. It's not a great distance, Multimap says it's 18.33km (11.39 miles) by road. I would have thought that would probably be something like twenty pounds or so by cab.
It's not a difficult juurney by Underground; the airport has two stations, terminals 1,2 and 3 are grouped around one, and terminal 4 has its own. At the other end the Hotel is close to Hammersmith station, and the trains run directly between them, so you wouldn't have to change. Obviously, being loaded down with luggage does make any walking a disadvantage though. I can't help, because I live a long way from that area, and don't have a car, but I wonder if there's a member who lives anywhere near that could give you a lift.
It would be a shame to miss the trip just because they can't send a car to meet you. Because of the luggage, I think I would probably opt for the cab option if I was doing it. If there was no luggage involved, then I would take the Underground.
Forget the train, Heathrow Express is a very expensive fast train to London Paddington, and Heathrow Connect is a cheaper, stopping service, but neither will get you to Hammersmith.
Once you've got to the hotel, and don't have the luggage, then London's an easy city to get around by public transport, and there's plenty of information readily available.
Posted by Ian Price (Member # 14) on 06-29-2007, 11:01 AM:
London is one of the easiest cities in the world to get around in. Just do your research.
Piccadilly Line
30-minutes
16.40 Pounds for the 3-day pass or:
$32.84 US
http://www.tfl.gov.uk/
For packing tips:
http://www.ricksteves.com/plan/tips/packlight.htm
Posted by Leo Enticknap (Member # 534) on 06-29-2007, 03:14 PM:
It is without luggage. I agree with Stephen on getting from Heathrow to the hotel, though. Even I - a reasonably fit 34 year-old - would have second thoughts about hauling a fortnight's stay's worth of luggage down the Piccadilly Line, especially during or close to a rush hour.
London might be relatively well served by public transport, but it's effin' expensive, IMHO. During a mad fortnight in April, I made three work trips in succession. The cost of local rail transport in the three cities I visited was as follows:
Boston
Logan Airport to New England Medical Center on the 'T' = $2.00 (about £1).
Amsterdam
Schiphol Airport to Centraal Station = 3 euros 60 (around £2). No. 2 tram from Centraal to Emmastraat = 1 euro 60 (around £1).
London
City Airport to Russell Square = £4 ![[Eek!]](eek.gif)
Four times as expensive as Boston, and about a third more expensive than Amsterdam for a typical airport-to-hotel journey.
As I only had one suitcase and hand carry-on per trip (the longest, to Boston, was four days) I did use public transport. If I'd had a fortnight's worth of stuff (two suitcases, basically) I suspect I would have just eaten the cost and gone for a cab.
Posted by Justin Gorka (Member # 3727) on 06-30-2007, 09:55 PM:
There are plenty of Hotels and Bead and Breakfasts that would be glad of your trade in January. I stayed in Fulham (think it was a Travel Inn or something similar) for £70 per night in February. Best to look on the internet. Food can be cheap if you know where to look and the beer is far better quality and more varied (if expensive) than the US. Have a look in a "Rough Guide" for ideas. Cheap does not always mean nasty!
Posted by Cameron Glendinning (Member # 3516) on 06-30-2007, 10:31 PM:
quote: Bernard Tonks
Seems strange that they removed the Vic 5's for a single Kinoton 35mm projector and Westrex Tower.
I thought those vic 5s were great, I too am surprised. I'm glad they have gotten rid of that ridiculously large screen though, and the new seat look ideal. I think I liked its old paint job more though. Benard thankyou for the link
quote: John Wilson
The guys running it in 1993 were useless morons
Harsh but true!
Does anyone know exactly when it was built? I heard that it is Londons oldest purpose built cinema. Its biggest claim to fame was that an infamous mass murderer called Christie was once the projectionist there.
Does anyone know what happened to Steve who was the chief there in 93? I heard he got sick and stopped working?
John, I wonder if the battleship gray repaint I did of the projection room back in 93 has been updated yet?
My fondest memories of London close to January was the snow.
Posted by Stephen Furley (Member # 1277) on 07-01-2007, 05:41 AM:
I thought this had to b about the Electric when I read about the 'ridiculously large screen'. I remember seeing that.
quote: Cameron Glendinning
Does anyone know exactly when it was built? I heard that it is Londons oldest purpose built cinema.
I can't give you an exact date, but I'm pretty sure it would be 1910 plus or minus one year.
There are several cinemas which claim to be London's oldest; there's not really any one cinema which has total rights to that claim. It's rather like 'who invented television?'; it depends on how you define 'television' and 'invented'.
The Phoenix, East Finchley, makes such a claim, by including the words 'continuously operating'. But then what does that phrase mean? Whenever it has been open it has operated as a cinema, but it has been closed three times in it's life for major alterations; in 1938 when the autitorium was turned round and new projection facilities built, sometime in the '70s, when the rake was increased to improve the sightlines and changes were made to the foyer, and again a few years ago when the auditorium was reduced in size, the foyer enlarged and ficilities for disabled users improved; I think that closure was about 18 months.
The original Auditorium at the Ritzy, Brixton dates from a similar time, and I think claims to be 'one of the oldest'. Of course, this has also been closed for extended periods, and much altered, during its life.
All of these, and many others built at the same time share similar architecture. Interestingly, quite a number still survive, whereas the next major development, the large 'super cinemas' of the late '20s and '30s, are almost extinct, or converted to other uses.
The reason for all of this cinema building activity at that time was the new regulations contained in the Cinematograph Act of 1909, which came into force in 1910, and which closed down many of the makeshift facilities previously used. For example, the Pullman, Herne Hill, closed in 1958, then Bingo for many years, then derelict for many more, then finally demolished a few years ago, replaced a makeshift cinema housed in one of the arches under the railway line. Again, the architecture was very similar, though I only managed to get inside the place not long before it was demolished when it was in very poor, and dangerous, condition.
There was an actor, I can't remember his name, who wanted to restore it as a live theatre, but it looked like a very lost cause when I saw it, and there was no room for backstage facilities, they even had to add an external brick box to the back wall to house the loudspeaker when the place was converted to sound. Can anybody remember this mans name? Leo might, because he worked as one of the actors at MOMI at one time, and Bernard might because he was a CTA member.
Posted by Leo Enticknap (Member # 534) on 07-01-2007, 06:36 AM:
I worked as a technician, not an actor, but the name doesn't ring a bell - sorry.
quote: Cameron Glendinning
Does anyone know exactly when it was built? I heard that it is Londons oldest purpose built cinema. Its biggest claim to fame was that an infamous mass murderer called Christie was once the projectionist there.
He was an 'assistant cinema projector' according to his Wikipedia biography! Coincidentially, the father of one of my colleagues was a young police officer, relocated to London immediately after the war, and rented the top floor flat of 10 Rillington Place for a couple of years immediately before the Evans family. He remembers helping Timothy and Beryl move their belongings in while he was in the process of moving out, and describes Christie as 'shifty' and 'weird'. At the time my friend's father put Christie's behaviour down to nervousness over his sub-letting the flat without the actual landlord's knowledge (and also thought he must be fiddling his taxes), and needless to say had a bit of a shock once the truth emerged a few years later.
Posted by Caleb Johnstone-Cowan (Member # 3710) on 07-03-2007, 06:19 PM:
The £4 fare quoted above is only if you don't have the Oyster smart card which is available for a £3 returnable deposit, with that fares are £1.50-2.50 in inner London.
quote: Claude S. Ayakawa
I must admit I am not too happy with the idea if toting a suitcase, garment bag and my laptop computer case on a subway or a cab in a foreign city I know nothing about and using a monetary system I am not accustomed.
The staff on the Underground are usually helpful and both stations have lifts. Otherwise does your airline offer a car service from Heathrow?
Our cinema was built in 1990 inside a building that went up in the late 19th Century, could we claim the 'oldest' tag
Posted by Mike Heenan (Member # 392) on 07-03-2007, 06:54 PM:
quote: Justin
There are plenty of Hotels and Bead and Breakfasts that would be glad of your trade in January. I stayed in Fulham (think it was a Travel Inn or something similar) for £70 per night in February. Best to look on the internet. Food can be cheap if you know where to look and the beer is far better quality and more varied (if expensive) than the US. Have a look in a "Rough Guide" for ideas. Cheap does not always mean nasty!
At 2 dollars to 1 pound, that's around 150 dollars after currency conversion fees etc. And that's cheap over there? Yikes.
Posted by Leo Enticknap (Member # 534) on 07-04-2007, 02:25 AM:
quote: Caleb Johnstone-Cowan
The £4 fare quoted above is only if you don't have the Oyster smart card which is available for a £3 returnable deposit, with that fares are £1.50-2.50 in inner London.
OK, but realistically, how many visitors are going to faff around doing that? If you ask me this is a cynical money-raising ploy, because (i) business travellers aren't going to care about the extra quid, because it'll go on the expenses claim, and (ii) most tourists won't want the hassle of finding out how to register for a smart card scheme. I can't think of any other major public transport system in the world which charges that big a premium for walk-on tickets.
quote: Mike Heenan
At 2 dollars to 1 pound, that's around 150 dollars after currency conversion fees etc. And that's cheap over there? Yikes.
Agreed completely, and the abnormal pound/dollar ratio must be affecting the tourist industry quite significantly now. Earlier this year a friend emailed me to say that she wouldn't be including Britain in her once-in-a-lifetime big European tour, largely for that reason. Instead I went over to Amsterdam for a weekend, and the cost of my hotel room per night was probably less than she'd have paid in public transport costs from the airport to the city where I live. The business writers in the papers seem to think that the pound is overvalued at the moment, though, so hopefully things will put themselves right before long (though not before I visit NY in September, though - I could do with those cheap dollars then!).
Posted by Bernard Tonks (Member # 809) on 07-04-2007, 10:18 AM:
quote: Stephen Furley
There was an actor, I can't remember his name, who wanted to restore it as a live theatre, but it looked like a very lost cause when I saw it, and there was no room for backstage facilities, they even had to add an external brick box to the back wall to house the loudspeaker when the place was converted to sound. Can anybody remember this mans name? Leo might, because he worked as one of the actors at MOMI at one time, and Bernard might because he was a CTA member.
It must have been the late Hubert Gregg.
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Hubert_Gregg
There are also some interesting external links.
Posted by Claude S. Ayakawa (Member # 1401) on 07-10-2007, 01:03 AM:
My last passport expired almost fifteen years ago and I did not have to apply for a new one until now. I applied for my current travel document on May 16th and did not pay extra for rush service because my trip to London is not until next January. After reading about the terrible twelve to thirteen week back log due to the new American government regulations that require every American who fly to Canada or Mexico to have a passport, I was not expecting mine until mid August. Imagine my surprise when I received the passport on June 30th- Six weeks and three days later after applying. Now that I have it, I have made up my mind, I will go on the trip.
-Claude
Posted by Stephen Furley (Member # 1277) on 07-10-2007, 02:48 AM:
quote: Bernard Tonks
It must have been the late Hubert Gregg.
No Bernard, he was a much younger man; I have a feeling his first name was Robert, but I'm not certain.
Posted by Leo Enticknap (Member # 534) on 07-10-2007, 02:59 AM:
quote: Claude S. Ayakawa
After reading about the terrible twelve to thirteen week back log due to the new American government regulations...
I think governments and officialdom generally have this habit of playing down people's expectations, so that (i) if things go wrong, they're not surprised, and (ii) if things do right, they're pleasantly surprised. Exactly the same thing happened when I renewed my passport last year: the official leaflet tells you to allow eight weeks (or make a 'fast track' application for a much bigger cost), whereas in fact mine arrived in just over two. Not that it should have taken any longer: it was simply a renewal of an existing passport that was still valid, so they didn't need to check references or anything like that - just print out a new one and stick the photo in it, basically. Furthermore, I made the application in January - not, in other words, when hundreds of thousands of people have just booked their summer holiday and have suddenly realised that they need a passport.
The other thing that annoyed me was with the photo. 'Use an approved photo booth', said their leaflet. It warned against trying to print out your own on a photo inkjet, because it might not conform to their regulations, in which case the form would come back and I'd have to start again. So I decided to use a 'passport approved' photo booth in order to avoid the hassle, even though they cost £5. Imagine my surprise, then, when the photo which came out with it was a low resolution, heavily compressed picture (I'd guess 200dpi at most), printed on cheap and nasty paper!
Posted by Gordon McLeod (Member # 33) on 07-10-2007, 09:41 AM:
Passport photos here must be taken at a approved photographers shop and they must stamp and certify the back
Posted by Claude S. Ayakawa (Member # 1401) on 07-10-2007, 12:27 PM:
I used to offer passport photo service and did thousands of them when I had operated my studio for over thirty years. During the B&W period, professional portrait studios were only the ones capable of doing them because we had a darkroom with the necessary equipment to do them. With the government approval of polaroid photographs and a specially designed camera to do them, almost everyone got in the act. I used to charge two for $10.00 when there was a professional market for them but one can get them today as low as $4.00 a pair. I still offer the service and do them with natural light and they are beautiful. I do not do too many anymore and the ones who have me do them are willing to wait a few days for them because they want nice looking images for their travel document. They also get twenty of them instead of two because I print them on a sheet of 8X10 paper.
-Claude
Posted by Leo Enticknap (Member # 534) on 07-10-2007, 02:35 PM:
The system here is that the Passport Office issues a list of tech specs to which the photo has to conform (available from here). In most post offices, railway stations etc. there are 'passport approved' photo booths, which produce photos which are guaranteed to be compliant. When I last renewed my passport I decided to use one, purely and simply to avoid the hassle of the application being thrown out because they didn't like the picture. Knowing our government I'm sure they've got some under-the-table deal going with the photo booth people to throw out as many independently produced pictures out as possible, in order to drive custom their way. Theoretically, the photo I've used for all other ID purposes in the last couple of years (staff ID card at work etc.) would do fine (I'm convinced it met the spec). If the £5 had actually bought a nice picture I wouldn't have minded so much: but I'm sure the camera in the photo booth machine was a cheap and nasty 2mp one (at most), and the print was bogstandard inkjet on thin, cheap inkjet photo paper. In short, it looked like it had been done on a £29.99 printer from Tesco with a remanufactured cartridge in it!
Posted by Claude S. Ayakawa (Member # 1401) on 07-11-2007, 02:03 AM:
My flight to London is now booked on United Airlines. I am leaving at 7:00 am out of Honolulu International on Wednesday, January 17 and fly to San Francisco and after two hours, connect to a non stop Boeing 777 flight to London and arrive in the city the next day at 11:25 am I am to catch a cab from the airport to my hotel and will be reimbursed by my hosts for the ride as well as the trip back to the airport. I will be in London until January 23rd when I fly back to Honolulu again via San Francisco but this time my stop will be three hours so I can clear U.S. customs. While in London, I am planning to do a lot of sight seeing and hopefully I can catch a good concert by the LSO , the Royal Philharmonic or other world reknowned groups.
-Claude.
Posted by Leo Enticknap (Member # 534) on 07-11-2007, 03:25 AM:
An 1125 arrival sounds like a good break. Most of the long-haul flights from America into Western European airports arrive between 0500-0800, so the queues for immigration etc. should have died down by the time you get in. Also, being in the middle of the working day, all the local services and transport will be operating (not that this is usually a problem in London anyway). Have a good trip.
Posted by Claude S. Ayakawa (Member # 1401) on 12-01-2007, 01:04 AM:
My long awaited trip to London is forty seven days or a little over six weeks away and I must admit I am getting very excited about going to Europe for the very first time. I was told that London's daytime temperature should be around forty seven degrees in mid January and on the wet side. That is not bad.
Here in the United States, everything is plus tax when I make any kind of purchase. What is it in the UK? Is the tax included or added on like here in the states? If there is added tax, how much will it be if I spent £50 ? As far as hotel rooms are concerned, sales tax, and other kind of tax are added on the bill here in the U.S such as a room tax. My host will pay for three nights of lodging in London and I will be responsible for two nights at £105 per day, If taxes are added to that amount, how much will it be?
-Claude
Posted by Bobby Henderson (Member # 840) on 12-01-2007, 01:20 AM:
I don't know anything about the tax system in the UK, but I hope you have saved up quite a bit of cash. The dollar has lost a lot of value over the last several months and is trading at or near record lows against the Euro -nearly $1.50 for every €1.
Posted by Stephen Furley (Member # 1277) on 12-01-2007, 03:58 AM:
Claude,
Most things in the UK are subject to V.A.T. (Value Added Tax). Some things are either exempt or zero-rated, books and most types of food for example, and I think childen's clothes, but that's not something that I ever buy. Hot take-away food, is subject to VAT. Exempt and zero-rated are not quite the same thing, but both mean that you don't pay V.A.T. on them, and you don't need to worry about the difference.
The standard rate of V.A.T is 17.5%, but there is a different rate for one or two things, domestic heating fuel, for example.
Prices may be quoted inclusive or exclusive of V.A.T., and don't always say which, so you need to be careful when comparing prices. Look for things like £5.95 inc. or £25 ex. or £25 exc. The final figure you are asked for, or that which is printed on your bill will include tax, put the prices on invividual items may not. If you have something delivered then V.A.T is charged on the total amount, including postage and packing etc.
Other types of tax, in particular the duty charged on things like alcoholic drinks, petrol and tobacco can be very high, but are included in the prices.
It is considered normal to tip people like waiters and cab drivers, generally at about 15%.
Be prepared for a shock when you see how expensive things are here; I reckon that many things are getting on for twice as expensive here as they are in New York, I've no idea how that compares with prices in Hawaii, and of course the fact that the Dollar is low at the moment doesn't help.
I don't know if you're planning to hire a car while you're here, but the last time I looked as I passed a filling station, I don't drive myself, the price was just a few pence over a pound per litre. A U.S. gallon is about 3.8 litres, and I think it's now slightly over two U.S. Dollars to the pound, so think about $8 per gallon.
Posted by Leo Enticknap (Member # 534) on 12-01-2007, 10:05 AM:
Virtually every consumer product you'll see in the shops has a price on it which includes VAT. It's not the case, as in the US (or at least, every US state I've visited), that you'll see a price tag of, say, $5.99, which is actually $6.34 once you get to the checkout. As Stephen says, your hotel bill may have the individual items listed without the VAT, and then the VAT added at the bottom. But again, the price on the bottom line is always the price that you'll pay.
There are also some stores in central London (or some departments in department stores), which sell VAT-free goods for tourists to take home. To be honest I'm not sure precisely how this works, but I think the procedure is that you pay the VAT up front, but are then given some kind of a certificate which you hand to customs when you leave the country, and then they'll credit your credit card with the tax back.
Visa and Mastercard credit and debit cards are accepted almost everywhere, though a significant number of shops and restaurants won't take American Express. Transactions of under £5 (ish) are usually done with cash, and many places won't thank you for trying to make a low value transaction with a credit card, because they have to pay a per transaction fee to their bank. A small but increasing number of places will accept debit cards without charge, but will add a 50p or £1 charge if you want to pay by credit card.
It's difficult to make a meaningful comparison because of the pound/dollar difference, but I'd guess that in real terms, alcoholic drinks bought in pubs and restaurants cost around the same as they do in the US; possibly a little less. When you're in London, do try a pint of real ale (beer). There are literally hundreds, and most pubs (apart from the big chain pubs, e.g. Wetherspoons) will usually have a local beer of some description on. Dunno how the duty on tobacco compares, because I don't smoke.
As Stephen says, what will really give you a heart attack is the price of gasoline (called petrol in Britain). Most stations sell three types: normal unleaded (95 RON), super unleaded (98 RON) or diesel. All except a few very powerful sports cars take normal unleaded, and any car you hire almost certainly will. Do not, whatever you do, fill a petrol-engined car up with diesel or vice-versa: that's a very expensive mistake to make! If you're not planning to leave the London area I wouldn't have thought you'd need to hire a car - the public transport is relatively good (though very expensive). If you are, you probably will. A good way to sum up car ownership in Britain is that living in London, it's difficult to live with a car, but living outside it's difficult to live without one!
I guess you may find driving a bit of a learning curve, primarily because we drive on the left side of the road and the driver's seat is the right front seat in the car. This page has some more details. The majority of cars in Britain do not have automatic gearboxes: if you're not familiar with manual gear changing, I'd suggest specifying an automatic when booking your hire car. The other thing I'd advise is to obey speed limits, even if the native drivers around you appear to be ignoring them (which the vast majority do). Britain's roads are now full of automatic 'speed cameras' which take a photo of a speeding car and use number plate recognition technology to identify it. If you're 'flashed', the hire company will probably add the fine (£60 in most cases) to your bill. A lot of native drivers on familiar routes know where the cameras are and slow down to pass them, or consider speeding tickets as a normal motoring expense; hence the fact that limits are not taken seriously by most drivers (especially the 70mph limit on freeways - called motorways here - on which most drivers tend to cruise at between 80-90 if the road is clear. In many counties, the police have a policy of ignoring speeding drivers who are doing less than 90 and not committing any other offence, but a camera might still get you).
Again, just to enlarge on Stephen's point: tipping for waiters in full-scale restaurants and taxi drivers is the norm, but not for anything else. For example, you wouldn't normally tip a barman after buying a pint in a pub (although some bars have 'thank you' boxes on them in which people might put their change if it's a relatively small amount, say 20-50p).
For public transport within London, it might be worth your getting a pre-pay electronic ticket called an Oyster card. You can add credit to it at tube (subway) stations and some newsagents, and the cost of individual tube and bus journeys is a lot cheaper than buying individual tickets. It also lets you bypass the usually long queues at the ticket machines in tube stations. I'm not sure how a non-UK resident would go about getting one, though: I had to apply for mine online and it arrived through the post. More info here.
Also, bear in mind that any DVDs you may buy while you're here will certainly be PAL and will almost certainly be region 2 (a small number - usually documentaries and special interest titles - are region-free). They'll only work back home if you have a multi-region player, and possibly a TV which can accept a PAL input signal (unless you have a player which does a full-scale conversion to NTSC).
The only other thing I'd flag up is that, I'm afraid, in January the days are very short. It isn't really light until around 8.30am, dusk is around 3-3.30pm and it'll be dark by 4.30. So make the most of the daylight for sightseeing!
Posted by Claude S. Ayakawa (Member # 1401) on 12-03-2007, 11:58 PM:
Thank you Stephen & Leo,
No, I am not planning to rent a car when I am in London because most of my time during the first three days will be spent at the convention. I am planning to spend Sunday afternoon and all day on Monday (1/20-21)) playing tourist and try to see as much of London as possible. By the way, because of a suit case,garment bag and my laptop in a carry bag i will take to London, I will be forced to get a cab when I arrive and depart. I know Hammersmith is not to far from the airport but how much do you think will I be charged for the cab fare including tip?. I just learned that the Novetel West in Hammersmith has a airport shuttle. If I use it, will it be cheaper? My hotel room will be £105 and I am not sure if this includes Tax or not. Because I will be spending a little over two hundred U.S. dollars a night for my hotel room, can one get by with £50 a day for meals and transportation?
-Claude
Posted by Leo Enticknap (Member # 534) on 12-04-2007, 01:39 AM:
quote: Claude S. Ayakawa
I know Hammersmith is not to far from the airport but how much do you think will I be charged for the cab fare including tip?.
Not sure, as I haven't taken a cab in London since 2002. That was from the city centre (junction of Tottenham Court Road/Stephen Street) to Heathrow, and cost £50ish (running out of time and I could claim it on expenses). From Hammersmith, my guess would be about half that, depending on the traffic.
quote: Claude S. Ayakawa
I just learned that the Novetel West in Hammersmith has a airport shuttle. If I use it, will it be cheaper?
All the airport/hotel shuttles which are run by the hotel I've used are complimentary to guests. Might be worth emailing them or ringing them to find out how much it costs (if anything) and where and when it goes from? The commercial airport shuttles (i.e. the ones which are run by a separate company and do a round robin from the airport to all the main hotels in a city centre) usually cost a bit more than normal public transport, but a lot less than a cab.
quote: Claude S. Ayakawa
My hotel room will be £105 and I am not sure if this includes Tax or not.
Whenever I've booked a hotel room in Britain the advertised price per night has always included VAT. But again, I'm sure they'd be happy to confirm that in a call or email.
quote: Claude S. Ayakawa
Because I will be spending a little over two hundred U.S. dollars a night for my hotel room, can one get by with £50 a day for meals and transportation?
Very easily, unless you're aiming to take a lot of cabs and/or eat in really upscale places.
Posted by Per Hauberg (Member # 529) on 12-06-2007, 07:53 PM:
Hello, Claude
I was in London this autumn for the first time in almost 20 years. While everything else has turned quite expensive since my last visit, they've still got a travel card for both underground and the famous double-deck buses, which is a bargain. -You can buy it for one or three days or a whole week. Underground is crowded, but very effective and the route map is easy to get along with. The walking distance, when changing from one line to another can surprise, though. The London Bus is charming, and fine sightseeing while getting around fairly quick, too. When not caught in traffic jam at the busiest hours as everybody else, those chauffeurs are driving as if they've stolen the bus - get a seat at once and avoid getting involved in Your own personal stunt-show !
Cab's had also turned expensive,and even most alarming: two of the three taxi's, we had during our stay (ordered through the hotel), ran without a meter - a little discomforting, I thought, even if it all turned out OK: 10 £ for a short trip, 20 for a long one...
Have a nice voyage !
Per
Posted by Leo Enticknap (Member # 534) on 12-07-2007, 05:50 AM:
quote: Per Hauberg
...they've still got a travel card for both underground and the famous double-deck buses, which is a bargain. -You can buy it for one or three days or a whole week.
I don't know how it compares with Scandinavia, but compared with every other international city I've visited recently, public transport in London is VERY expensive.
For example, subway ticket from airport to downtown in Boston = $2. One way tube ticket from City Airport to Russell Square in Lond = £4 ($8). Schiphol Airport to Central Station in Amsterdam = 2.60 euros ($3.50ish). Schönefeld Airport to the Hauptbahnhof in Berlin = 3.90 euros.
Posted by Tim Rectanus (Member # 3282) on 12-07-2007, 11:19 AM:
Hey, I am heading across the pond at the end of January too. This has been a helpful thread on many fronts. I thought the plane ticket would be cheaper considering it is off season. Of course most surprising is the amount of tax on an airline ticket. The tax is close to, if not more than, the price of the fare. Kinda crazy to me but I prepared myself for the shock to the wallet in regards to this trip.
I am going strictly for personal reasons with some friends. They are participating in a race somewhere in Birmingham called Tough Guy. It is an obstacle course race with military roots. http://www.toughguy.co.uk/ I am not a tough guy in this sense so I am just going along for the pints. The idea sounds good but in my initial attempts at training, I realized that running even though I am an athlete and can hold my own in almost any sport, just running is incredibly boring, so I was done at that point. Should be a fun trip though, and it will be my first time in England. We will spend most of the time in London but are taking a few day trips to see friends around the UK. The highlight of the trip for me, and the reason I am going at all, is to attend the 3 or 4 football matches we have planned. I can't freakin wait for that. I have followed the EPL for about 3 or 4 years now, ever since Fox Soccer Channel starting picking up more games (they normally have 4 a week now) and I look forward to seeing some of the class in person.
Since we are taking the train a bunch, we are getting BritRail passes. My question is, what is the difference in 1st class and 2nd class? Is 1st worth the extra $150? I think our longest trip is London to Edinborough so the time on the trains isn't too long. The two guys I am going with are both over 6'5" so if there is a significant increase in legroom, we would probably go the 1st class route.
Posted by Leo Enticknap (Member # 534) on 12-07-2007, 04:11 PM:
It's absolutely, 200% worth an extra $150 in my opinion, for London to Edinburgh alone (the city where I live, York, is about halfway along that route and so I've used those trains quite a lot). Standard class on a British long distance train is a similar sort of seat to coach class on a US internal flight as far as seat width legroom goes - not nice for a four-hour trip. A few few of the seats have tables and offer more room, but unless you reserve seats in advance you're very unlikely to get one. Furthermore, on trains running at peak time, you will probably have to stand for at least part of the journey. First class virtually guarantees you a seat without needing to reserve in advance, and it'll have a lot more legroom (most of the seats have tables; only a few are airline style and even they have far more legroom than standard). Another point to keep in mind is luggage space. There isn't nearly enough of it in standard class, and you may end up having to leave your suitcase at the end of a carriage where you can't see it and it might get nicked. Some of the train companies (including the one which runs the London-Edinburgh trains) also give you free coffee, peanuts etc. in first class, and there are also powerpoints for laptops. Wifi Internet access is free on the London-Edinburgh trains in first class, but costs £5 an hour in standard.
If the extra $150 upgrades you to first class for unlimited journeys on the whole duration of your trip, it's well worth it. That's less than the difference between standard and first for a single round-trip journey between York and London.
Posted by Claude S. Ayakawa (Member # 1401) on 12-09-2007, 10:25 PM:
Leo & Stephen,
I will need to get some British currency from my bank very soon to pay for cab fare from the airport to the hotel and other expenses the day I arrive in the UK and was wondering how much should I order. I do not want to cary too much cash but I want to make sure I have enough for the cab, I plan to have at least fifty dollars to take care of curb side luggage handling, magazines and snacks at the airports in Honolulu, Los Angeles and San Francisco. Will £75 be enough and in what denomination should I get? Although I have two credit cards, I am planning to pay for all of my expenses with a debit card. It will be a Visa and will my hotel and most establishment accept it as well as ATM's? By the way, I was told a ATM is the cheapest way to get British currency after the conversion from dollars. Is that true?
Regarding the possible wet weather, How bad is it? Is is just light showers most of the time or is it usually heavy rain?
-Claude
Posted by Leo Enticknap (Member # 534) on 12-10-2007, 04:36 AM:
Visa is accepted pretty much everywhere. I'm sure the hotel will have no problem with it, though in some cases if you're paying with a debit rather than a credit card, they might want to debit a deposit at the start of your stay, which will then be refunded (less the bill) when you check out. Again, I'm sure that a quick call or email to the hotel will resolve this.
In central London you'll never be more than a few minutes' walk from an ATM. However, I'm not sure what your best bet will be to minimise bank charges on the currency conversion. In my case I have a separate bank current account which I use for overseas travel (and ordering stuff online in a foreign currency), because it doesn't charge anything for currency conversions on debit card transactions. So I simply transfer how much I'm going to need plus a bit for contingencies into that account, and withdraw cash from ATMs as and when I need to. The exchange rate on it isn't the best, but it's not bad and the slight cost is well worth it to avoid the hassle of having to buy foreign currency before I leave.
In London, be sure to use ATMs situated in bank branches, or in public places (e.g. railway stations) which have the name of a major bank on them (e.g. NatWest, HSBC, Lloyds/TSB or Abbey). There are some ATMs in places like convenience stores and pubs which are run by separate companies and which have massive transaction charges - sometimes as much as £5 a time. In a small town or village there's sometimes no choice but to use one, but in the middle of London you should never have to use an ATM which charges.
It might be worth talking to your bank before you go and finding out what (if anything) they'll charge you (as distinct from the operator of an ATM) when you use your debit card to withdraw cash from a UK ATM, and if necessary, exploring if there's a cheaper option (e.g. travelers' cheques).
You'll find ATMs in the arrivals area at Heathrow too, but if you want the peace of mind of bringing some pounds with you, then £75 should be enough to get you to your hotel. The common paper denominations are £5 (a fiver), £10 (a tenner) and £20. All of these are in everyday use, though if you try to buy a very low-value item with a £20 note, you may be asked if you've got anything smaller. Fivers are now getting a bit rarer, because many ATMs don't handle them any more (a subtle indication of the effects of inflation, I guess!). There is also a £50 note, but they are very unusual and hardly ever used. The coin denominations are 1p, 2p, 5p, 10p, 50p, £1 and £2 - all have the value clearly written on them and and increase sequentially in size, and so are pretty easy to distinguish between. Due to fears about forgery, some places refuse to accept £50 notes. If you are buying British currency in the US, I'd suggest asking for anything except £50s.
As for the rain, it's very hard to say! You could get a cold but clear few days, or it could chuck it down the whole time. The weather recently has been overcast but with not that much actual downfall. One thing I think I can confidently say is that it's likely to be a lot colder than Hawaii, though! Temperatures of 5-10 during the day and 0-5 at night are most likely, at a guess.
Obviously I hope this proves to be unnecessary, but the other thing it might be worth doing is ensuring that your travel insurance is OK for emergency healthcare cover. Britain's healthcare provision is almost entirely through a state-run system called the National Health Service, which is free at the point of delivery for UK and European Union citizens. I believe that emergency care in NHS hospitals is also free for visitors from outside the UK/EU, but I'm not completely sure about what is and isn't covered, and what paperwork you need to have, should you need it. Obviously I hope that you won't need it, but it's best to be safe rather than sorry and I'm sure your travel insurance provider will be able to make sure that you're completely covered and have the relevant documents.
Posted by Tim Rectanus (Member # 3282) on 01-03-2008, 03:00 PM:
Leo,
An idea popped into my big ole noggin this week and I wondered if you might be able to answer a few quetions.
The question-About how long is a train ride from Birmingham to St. Andrews? or Gatwick to St. Andrews?
The backstory if you want it-I mentioned before that my friends were crossing the pond for the Tough Guy race in Wolverhamption and the race is around 4-5 hours long. From the website and the talk I have heard it doesn't seem like it will be much of a spectator event. Well, after the race we were planning on heading to Edinburgh to have the next day there. Edinburgh is not that far from St. Andrews so I got this crazy idea that I would see if it may be possible to play the Old Course. My thought is that we arrive Friday am (off the overnight) at London Gatwick, hop a train/s to Birmingham where they have their race on Saturday. I would leave them there and continue on to Edinburgh and possibly the St. Andrews area to be able to play sometime on Saturday. It is a lot of traveling in two days but to play the Old Course, it is a price I would be willing to pay. Does this sound like a possibility or am I just day dreaming. BTW, we have BritRail passes, to include Scotland (and Wales but who wants to go to Wales) for the week so train prices aren't an issue. Thanks for any help you may be able to provide, or for all the help you have already provided.
Posted by Leo Enticknap (Member # 534) on 01-03-2008, 03:59 PM:
The nearest train station to St. Andrews is Leuchars, which is about 5-6 miles away. I don't know what the state of play is once you get to the station - there may be a bus, but you might need to take a cab or hire a car. The National Rail Enquiries website gave me journey times of between 5 and 7 hours when I asked it for a 9am departure from Birmingham on a weekday, all of which involved one change in Edinburgh and some of which involved two changes.
When you first posted your query, my first thought was to suggest that you took a LoCo flight from Birmingham to Edinburgh (Flybe and Easyjet do them); but once you've factored in getting from Edinburgh to St. Andrews, I don't think that'll really save you much time.
Unless you're leaving at crack of dawn on the Saturday, I don't think you'd have time to get there and play a round on the same day. Building in an overnight stop in St. Andrews would make it work, though - e.g. if you aimed to arrive in the evening, play the following morning and head south in the afternoon. Going back from Leuchars to London takes around 5 hours (one from Leuchars to Edinburgh, then four from Edinburgh to London), and you should be fine for departures up until late afternoon. The Rail Enquiries site will give you specific times for when you want to go.
Posted by Claude S. Ayakawa (Member # 1401) on 01-04-2008, 12:30 AM:
January 16, my departure date for London is getting closer and I have just started to shop for some nice warm new clothes, and essential things I will need such as electronic power converters and a pouch for money and my passport to wear under my shirt. I still have some portrait orders I will have to finish and deliver and wrap up my visual power point presentation I have been working on since last April when I was invited to speak at the SWPP convention. How has the weather been so far in London, Stephen and Leo?
-Claude
Posted by Stephen Furley (Member # 1277) on 01-04-2008, 02:04 AM:
In the last few days it's been quite pleasant during the day, quite a bit of Sun, though rather cold, though warmer than it was just before Christmas; it's well above freezing now. Snow had been forecast, but we haven't seen any.
The temperature often drops rapidly after sunset during the Winter though if the sky is clear. If you're going to be out in the evening you'll need a coat.
Posted by Leo Enticknap (Member # 534) on 01-04-2008, 05:17 AM:
About 5cm of snow fell overnight on Wednesday-Thursday here (about 215 miles north of Stephen), during which the temperature dropped to -3.2; but it's all gone now, with dry, overcast weather and a more typical January daytime temperature of 4.0.
The BBC's long-term weather forecast says the following for 14-27 January:
quote:
A mild southwesterly airstream is expected to dominate, although southeasterly winds may affect Southern England at times bringing the risk of overnight frosts. Northwest Scotland looks set for quite a bit of rain, with Northern England and Northern Ireland also seeing more than their fair share.
So, in as far as forecasts that far ahead can be taken seriously, they're guessing cold and dry.
Posted by Claude S. Ayakawa (Member # 1401) on 01-04-2008, 11:27 AM:
Hi Leo & Stephen,
I hope the good weather prediction will hold and it will be very nice and dry during my stay in London. I will be spending a lot of times in doors from the time I arrive on Thursday until Sunday at the convention but when I go on the city tour on Monday, let there be lots of sun with temperatures in the high forties.
-Claude
Posted by Dick Vaughan (Member # 540) on 01-08-2008, 07:32 AM:
It was bright with blue skies over most of the weekend although it's raining at the moment with the same forecast for the next few days.
I'm down here in London for the next 12 days while we replace and paint the IMAX screen at the Science Museum.
What a way to start the New Year ![[Roll Eyes]](rolleyes.gif)
Posted by Leo Enticknap (Member # 534) on 01-08-2008, 04:48 PM:
quote: Claude S. Ayakawa
...let there be lots of sun with temperatures in the high forties.
Sorry Claude, but I think I can pretty much guarantee that you'll be kissing goodbye to temperatures in the forties when you step onto that plane in Honolulu. The mid-teens is exceptionally warm for Britain in January during the day: between 3 and 8 is more realistic. It could well dip below zero during the night, though that's unlikely in London (all the residual heat from buildings etc.) unless we get a really cold snap.
I've got one of those weather station gadgets with an outside sensor, which has been gathering data since I was given it for Christmas in 2004. The hottest it's ever recorded was on 16 July 2006 / 1442 hours, at 33.4 degrees. It wasn't a particularly warm summer, but there was a mini-heatwave for those two weeks in July. Incidentally, there was also a heatwave on the east coast of America the following week: I flew there three days later, on the day the power went down over half of New York because the demand from air conditioners tipped the system over. During the entire flight from Amsterdam to Boston I did not see a single cloud - it was very weird.
Posted by Mark Hajducki (Member # 1732) on 01-08-2008, 07:44 PM:
According to the bus company Stagecoach there seems to be 4 buses an hour between Leuchars and St Andrews and there is about 1 train an hour between Edinburgh and Leuchars Train Timetable. The train journey will take you over the Forth Rail Bridge.
Looking at the weather tonight I don't think a game of golf on the beach would be a good idea.
quote:
There are warnings of gales in all areas except Trafalgar and Southeast Iceland.
quote:
West to southwesterly winds will increase later Tuesday evening, gusting to 60mph especially in exposed locations. Overnight the wind will continue to increase, gusting 70 to 80mph, with isolated gusts to 90 mph possible in exposed locations. The public are advised to take extra care and refer to Traffic Scotland for further advice on road conditions.
Issued at: 1847 Tue 8 Jan
Posted by Leo Enticknap (Member # 534) on 01-09-2008, 12:59 AM:
That would up his handicap a bit...
Posted by Stephen Furley (Member # 1277) on 01-09-2008, 03:06 AM:
It's pretty reasonable in London this morning; several degrees above freezing and sunny. There was rain yesterday and overnight.
Posted by Tim Reed (Member # 137) on 01-10-2008, 05:34 PM:
quote: Mark Hajducki
there seems to be 4 buses an hour between Leuchars and St Andrews
I would purely love to play St. Andrews... ![[Cool]](cool.gif)
I will have to make that pilgrimage some day.
Posted by Stephen Furley (Member # 1277) on 01-11-2008, 02:34 AM:
Weather is still very changeable; yesterday it was wet and windy; the same so far today. It's certainly not cold for the time of year, as it was before Christmas. There was snow forecast a week or so ago, but we didn't get any this far South. I really wouldn't like to predict what it will be like by the time you arrive Claude. It least the days are starting to get a bit longer now.
Posted by Claude S. Ayakawa (Member # 1401) on 01-13-2008, 12:02 AM:
It is hard to believe I will finally be in London by this time next week. My flight leaves very early this Wednesday morning and once I am airborne, I will be in London in about twenty hours. Once I arrive, a mini van the hotel had dispatched to pick me up will be waiting for me at the curb. The £55 fare is obscene but my hosts who had invited me will be taking care of it so thats not too bad. I will pretty much spend most of my time during the day at the conference including my two hour presentation scheduled for next Saturday from twelve noon to two O clock. It will consists of a eight minute video presentation on a DVD of many of my award winning images and a illustrated talk on environmental portrait lighting. If it rains between Thursday January 17th to Sunday, the 20th I will no problem but let there be plenty of sun on Monday, the 21st when I am planning to go on a Gray Line tour of old and new London. It is hard to believe a ten mile cab ride costing £55 when the all day tour including lunch at Covent Garden will only be £69. Now that is a wonderful bargain! By the way, when will most stores that sell CD and DVDs close on Thursday and Friday nights as well as Monday in London? I am also interested in buying some "London" t shirts as gifts as well as for myself. Do you have Crazy Shirt stores in London?
-Claude
Posted by Dick Vaughan (Member # 540) on 01-13-2008, 05:24 AM:
Claude
Just head to Piccadily Circus and Leicester Square if you want crazy T shirts!
Thursday is late opening night on Oxford Street one of the big shopping areas . Most of the stores stay open until 8 or 9.
Zavvi in Piccadilly, one of the biggest record stores, stays open until 11pm every night apart from Sunday.
Posted by Ray Faultless (Member # 903) on 01-13-2008, 05:24 AM:
Claude shops selling shirts and gifts are everywhere in London,as for that £55 taxi fare that is a bit much but dont forget we dont tip 15% over here to cab drivers. May I just suggest you visit Leicester Square while you are here. Being a cinema lover it would be a shame not to see our most famous cinemas.If you should go inside to see a show and you choose the Odeon you must go in the Royal circle.Have a great visit.
Posted by Dick Vaughan (Member # 540) on 01-13-2008, 06:03 AM:
By all means visit the Leicester Square Odeon but be prepared to pay up to £14 ($28)for a ticket!
Posted by Ray Faultless (Member # 903) on 01-13-2008, 08:33 AM:
£14 for the first show £17.50 after that. Yes it is high prices but this may be a once in a lifetime chance for Claude being as its so far to travel.
Posted by Cameron Glendinning (Member # 3516) on 01-13-2008, 04:37 PM:
Make sure you only go to the big cinema at Odeon Lester square complex or at the Empire complex, As the other screens were NOT worth the money ( disclamer, 15 years ago was the last time I was in London!)
The Empire screen one was impressive, cinema 2 had once been a small newsreel cinema, Screen 3 was once a managers office
Odeon Lester Square is amazing and has been restored since I was there (the photos I have seen are jaw dropping good) but screen 1 2000 plus seats, screens 2-7 have less than 100 seats.
I hope you have a safe flight!
Posted by Leo Enticknap (Member # 534) on 01-13-2008, 04:40 PM:
£17.50 for a seat in the fleapit? Bugger me with a soldering iron!!! I wonder if that holds the world record for the most expensive (routine, i.e. excluding special event screenings) cinema admission for a normal scheduled show.
The National Film Theatre on the south bank of the Thames (nearest tube = Waterloo) offers a much more diverse range of films to see (including silents presented with live music, and usually perfect technical presentation of all formats), and the tickets are still 'only' £8ish. But it has to be admitted that none of the three auditoria come even close to matching the Odeon Leicester Square for impressiveness of the space.
Posted by Claude S. Ayakawa (Member # 1401) on 01-13-2008, 11:30 PM:
Hello Everyone,
Thank you for the very useful information about the London cinema theatre you had recommended. I will try to go to the Odeon if time will permit. Will it be difficult for someone like me who does not know London to easily find it? Haw far is it from Hammersmith? By the way, what are they showing during the coming week? I might be able to find the time to go Friday night if I had recovered from my twenty hour flight. I hate to spend all that money and find myself falling asleep.
-Claude
-
Posted by Leo Enticknap (Member # 534) on 01-14-2008, 01:11 AM:
Eastbound Piccadilly Line tube from Hammersmith to Leicester Square - about 3-4 miles, and takes around 20-25 minutes. The cinema is about 100 yards from the station, on the Charing Cross Road side of the square.
Odeon Leicester Square Programme - it'll change on Friday, though.
Posted by Cameron Glendinning (Member # 3516) on 01-14-2008, 03:39 PM:
I stand corrected, as from Odeon site above
quote:
Leicester Square:
1679 seats
4 wheelchair spaces
DTS & SDDS
Mezzanine 1:
60 seats
1 wheelchair space
DDS
Mezzanine 2:
50 seats
DDS
Mezzanine 3:
60 seats
DDS
Mezzanine 4:
60 seats
DDS
Mezzanine 5:
60 seats
DDS
The NFT screen 1 is pretty good, based on a classic 50's Fox Cinemascope house, The programming is very interesting. Presentation at the highest standards.
Posted by Leo Enticknap (Member # 534) on 01-14-2008, 05:52 PM:
Agreed - you don't want to be watching a 1.38 film sitting in one of the side blocks of seats in NFT1. Your neck won't forgive you for days!
Posted by Howard Johnson (Member # 62) on 01-15-2008, 04:22 AM:
Don't forget that London is not typical of the UK, if you have time try to go to a provincial town which is not far such as Brighton. It's by the sea, only 52 minutes by train, has a fantasy Royal Pavilion and a Victorian pier.
Posted by Stephen Furley (Member # 1277) on 01-17-2008, 01:25 PM:
Well, Claude should be here by now. I'm not sure what time he was due to arrive, or whether he will have been affected by today's events at Heathrow, aircraft crash landed on a BA flight from Beijing. According the the BBC "All BA short-haul flights from Heathrow have been cancelled and others delayed."
http://news.bbc.co.uk/1/hi/england/london/7194086.stm
I'm not sure if both runways could still be used, but given the position where the aircraft came to rest, I think it may well have closed the Southern one.
Posted by Leo Enticknap (Member # 534) on 01-17-2008, 03:53 PM:
Just got out of the train at Dundee en route to a meeting, and walking to the hotel a TV in the window of an electronics shop was showing the headline 'Airliner crash lands at Heathrow'. 'Yikes - Claude!' was my first thought, and I was relieved to find when I got to my room and switched on the radio that it was a flight from Beijing, not San Francisco (and, of course, that no-one was seriously hurt).
If Claude was on a transatlantic red eye he should have got in before the disruption started. Fingers crossed. And with any luck, some west London scrap merchant should have worked out how to tow away the carcass of a written off 777 by the time he heads home!
I guess it's too early to speculate, but I'll do so anyway: given that there was no fire and that the power from both engines appears to have failed shortly before landing, I can't help but wonder if the BA plane ran out of fuel for some reason.
Posted by Ben Wales (Member # 92) on 01-17-2008, 04:12 PM:
Two reasonable Eating places I can recommend in Central London is the West End Kitchen and Stockpot, both in Panton Street and only 5 mins walk from Licester Square!.
They are a few yards away from the Odeon Cinema in Panton Street.
For Beer several Real Ales Pubs in the area, for the Cheapest Beer in Liecester Square is the Wetherspoons Pub "Moon Under The Water" next to the Odeon L/S (the big one), this pub is a favourite haunt for Projectionists in the West End ![[beer]](graemlins/beer.gif)
.
Posted by Stephen Furley (Member # 1277) on 01-17-2008, 04:24 PM:
quote:
If Claude was on a transatlantic red eye he should have got in before the disruption started. Fingers crossed. And with any luck, some west London scrap merchant should have worked out how to tow away the carcass of a written off 777 by the time he heads home!
Would they allow it to be moved before it had been inspected where it stood by investigators? If the runway did have to be closed the presumably the flights which were cancelled were to allow the remaining one to be used by incoming flights which were already on their way.
I received an e-mail from Claude on Tuesday, in which he said that his fright was at 07:00, I think that's 15:00 London time, and that the journey would last 17 hours, including two hours in LA. If I'm correct that would have got him into London at 08:00 this morning; I'm not sure what time the accident happened. I hope he arrived before it happened, and wasn't delayed by it; that's about the last thing he'd need after a flight that long. At least nobody was seriously hurt in the accident.
I don't know what Heathrow's like to get into with a foreign passport, the only airport where I've done that in recent years is Newark, where the queues look worrying long, but there are loads of desks, and they actually clear them quite quickly. The previous one was Leningrad in 1974, where they hardly glanced at our passports and visas, and we were cleared in seconds. There weren't many people entering the airport at that time though.
edit:
Sorry Leo, I missed the words 'By the time he heads home' in your post.
Posted by Ben Wales (Member # 92) on 01-17-2008, 04:32 PM:
quote: Stephen Furley
I hope he arrived before it happened, and wasn't delayed by it; that's about the last thing he'd need after a flight that long.
It was a British Airways Boeing 777 from China and it happened at 12:40pm and lost all power on final approach and landed just short of the Runway and skidded without Landing wheels etc.
If it was not the skill of the Pilot and Crew this could had been a lot worst so it is been reported tonight.
Posted by Leo Enticknap (Member # 534) on 01-18-2008, 03:18 AM:
quote: Stephen Furley
Would they allow it to be moved before it had been inspected where it stood by investigators? If the runway did have to be closed the presumably the flights which were cancelled were to allow the remaining one to be used by incoming flights which were already on their way.
Reported just now that (i) the pranged Boeing may have to be left in situ for some time in order to complete investigations, as you say, and (ii) that the runway was now open, with flights taking off starting at the opposite end. This strikes me as a bit dodgy, because it can't give departing passengers much confidence taking off over the wreckage of a crashed airliner, and, more importantly, what happens if a departing flight has to abort its take-off for some reason and ends up near or at the site where investigators are working?
quote: Stephen Furley
I don't know what Heathrow's like to get into with a foreign passport...
An American friend who tried it in 2004 described the experience using language you'd expect to hear in a Tarantino film. She was in the queue for three hours, mainly because she had the bad luck to be in the queue behind passengers on a flight from Pakistan, many of whom, for obvious reasons, were being asked a lot of questions.
quote: Stephen Furley
...the only airport where I've done that in recent years is Newark, where the queues look worrying long, but there are loads of desks, and they actually clear them quite quickly.
I've heard horror stories about the larger airports, and in particular have been advised to avoid entering the US through JFK or LAX. Partly for that reason and partly because they fly a connection from the easiest airport to get to from where I live (Teesside), I always use KLM/Northwest for trips to the US unless they're a lot more expensive than another option. You arrive in the US at either Minneapolis and Memphis, where there is only one international arrival being processed at any time; and so even in the worst case scenario (being seated right at the back of the plane) the wait is never more than 20-30 minutes. If you can online book a seat near the front of the economy cabin, you can be through in ten minutes flat.
Posted by Tim Rectanus (Member # 3282) on 01-18-2008, 12:49 PM:
Oh, I have a lot of catching up to do on this thread. The opening of U23D this comin week as well as another film that we are opening when I am in the UK means I haven't had time to sit down at the computer and check in.
First off, thanks for all of your help leading up to my trip, I am echoeing Claude's sentiments but I got answers here that I probably never would have found on my own.
Glad to hear that Claude was likely not affected by the happenings of the flight from Beijing. I am sure he is enjoying his time in London, as I will be doing in about a week or so. I get on my plane in 7 days and 3 hours, my time. I think I will celebrate my arrival with a pint, can you get a pint at 7 am?
BTW, I am not too worried about the Passport Cues, there can't be that many people who want to go to London in January, can there?
Posted by Ray Faultless (Member # 903) on 01-18-2008, 12:54 PM:
Yes Tim you can get a pint at 7am. We have 24hrs drinking now so you will find a place open at that time.
Posted by Stephen Furley (Member # 1277) on 01-18-2008, 01:10 PM:
quote: Tim Rectanus
BTW, I am not too worried about the Passport Cues, there can't be that many people who want to go to London in January, can there?
For many years Heathrow was the World's busiest airport; I read yesterday that it's now the third busiest. I don't know which others have overtaken it, I would guess possibly JFK, and somewhere in Asia. Heathrow has two main runways and four terminals, with a fifth due to open this year. Heathrow was handling more passengers at its four terminals than JFK did at its nine; Heathrow is a very busy, and horrible, place.
London's second airport, Gatwick, has one runway, and two terminals; it is the Worlds busiest single-runway airport. So yes, there will be a lot of people coming to London at any time.
There are three other airports, Luton, Stanstead and London City, but they are considerably smaller, and London City is tiny.
Regular scheduled flights from the US to London will be likely to use either Heathrow or Gatwick.
quote: Leo Enticknap
I've heard horror stories about the larger airports, and in particular have been advised to avoid entering the US through JFK or LAX.
I've flown out of JFK once, about four years ago, when it was a long ride on the 'A' Subway to Howard Beach, and then a bus ride. It's easier to get to now, but I'd still try to avoid it. I've never flown into it, and don't want to. I think there's a lot to be said for using somewhat smaller, second ranking, airports like Gatwick and Newark rather than the main ones like JFK and Heathrow. They're big enough to have reasonable facilities, but not as crowded as the very large ones.
When you arrive in a country on a long-haul flight, tired and jet-lagged, just about the last thing you need is to stand in a queue for ages waiting to be admitted. I once had to wait almost an hour at Newark, when several delayed flights all arrived at almost the same time, but about 15-20 minutes seems to be more typical. Getting through US Customs has never taken me more than about thirty seconds. Baggage claim also seems to be pretty quick at Newark, quicker than Heathrow or Gatwick. Gatwick often has a long walk to the terminal when you get off the plane, but otherwise it's not too bad, as airports go.
Has anybody heard from, or met, Claude since he arrived?
[ 01-18-2008, 03:01 PM: Message edited by: Stephen Furley ]
Posted by Dick Vaughan (Member # 540) on 01-19-2008, 10:39 AM:
quote: Tim Rectanus
I get on my plane in 7 days and 3 hours, my time. I think I will celebrate my arrival with a pint, can you get a pint at 7 am?
So Tim how long are you staying in London?
quote: Tim Rectanus
BTW, I am not too worried about the Passport Cues, there can't be that many people who want to go to London in January, can there?
That's so funny!
I'm in town at the moment and the place is packed with student groups from everywhere across the known world
Posted by Tim Rectanus (Member # 3282) on 01-21-2008, 10:42 AM:
I leave here this Friday and arrive in London at dawn on Saturday and we come back on an afternoon flight on the 3rd.
My itenerary looks something like this. (gonna see a lot of countryside on trains I guess)
Arrive Sat. to Gatwick Hop a train to Birmingham, bus to Wolverhampton.
Bus back to Birmingham for Villa v Blackburn at 3pm (could be close)
Tough Guy race in Wolverhampton on Sunday
Then a train to Edinburgh Sunday afternoon and do what one does at night in Edinburgh.
Monday -Check out the Castle and Arthur's Seat in Edinburgh, then hop over to St. Andrews to have a look around, maybe. Then back to Edinburgh on Tuesday
Tuesday afternoon- Head to Bolton for Bolton v Fulham on Tuesday night.
Dick- Is there an easy way to swing through Bradford on our way to Bolton? If so I might try to stop in and check out that new screen and say hello.
Fulham are my favorite team (they have all those Yanks) so I wish this game was at Craven Cottage but at least we get to sit amongst the Fulham supporters for this one. Too bad Fulham can't finish a game out this year, I don't know why they can't stop conceding goals in the last 10 minutes but it is starting to mess with my heart!! Hopefully that will change soon and they can try and fend off what looks to be an inevitable relegation spot.
Wednesday and beyond- On to London for sightseeing and what nots. Chelsea v Reading on Wed night. We will be in London most of the rest of our trip except for a trip to Portsmith for Pompei v Chelsea on Saturday. (I know Chelsea again, we tried to get Man U v Tot on Saturday and get to an Arsenal game at the Emirates on Wed but they were sold out.) Other than that I am not sure what the plan is for London. I will see if we have time to stop in the IMAX Theatre there as well as the normal Tourist activities. I am starting to go to bed early, 7 or 8 pm here and get up at 3 or 4am to try and cut down on the Time Zone shift but don't know if that will work since we open a U2 on Wed. midnight (as Tuesday turns to Wed.) We will see.
Oh and you can get a pint 24 hours a day, I think I love this place already.
Posted by Ray Faultless (Member # 903) on 01-21-2008, 12:43 PM:
Tim you dont need a bus from Birmingham to Wolverampton your train from Gatwick may go thru to Wolverampton if not just change at Birmingham. The train is much easier than a bus just there.
Posted by Tim Rectanus (Member # 3282) on 01-21-2008, 12:47 PM:
OH Thanks Ray! That would speed things up a bit, not having to get the bus.
TR
Posted by Dick Vaughan (Member # 540) on 01-21-2008, 12:58 PM:
Hi Tim
The new screen is at London Science Museum not in Bradford.
I will (should) be in Bradford Tuesday but Edinburgh to Bolton is going to take a fair while so you will be pushed to make it if you stop off.
I will possibly be in London from the 31st to the 2nd so perhaps we may meet up .
Posted by Claude S. Ayakawa (Member # 1401) on 01-27-2008, 11:57 PM:
I have been home almost a week now since returning from my trip to London last Tuesday. I am very happy to report, the trip was very successful and I got to see and do a lot of things I had planned except checking out the excellent cinema facilities in the city. I was almost tempted to see a movie at a cinema complex at Piccadilli Circus across the street from the gayly lit building that houses a Burger King restaurant. The theatre was not fronting the street but in a long corridor towards the back. If some of you know what theatre I am referring, is it a good theatre and if it is, did I miss out on anything?
The conference itself was great and my two hour presentation was very well received. I am glad it was because I had put a lot of time and effort into the Power Point presentation since i started to work on it last April when I had received an invitation to travel and speak at that conference. Beside spending a lot of time at the convention, I did get to tour some of the famous parts of the city including Piccadilli Circus, Westminster Abbey, Tower of London, Parliament Building, Tower Bridge, Covent Garden, a boat ride on the Thames River and I saw the Royal Mounted Guards. I did get to use the Tube when I went to Picadelli Circus and Westminster.
Beside the terribly long flights to London from Honolulu and back, the cost of almost everything in London was frightening. Since I was provided with about £45 of food allowance along with my round trip air fare and three night lodging, I ate a pizza and some vegetables with a glass of ice tea and the bill was £12 in the hotel dinning room. Cab fare from Heathrow to the hotel was £55 and the return trip was £40. My United Airlines 777 flight arrived an hour and a half before the British Air 777 crash landed at Heathrow and forced the airport to shut down for a couple of hours. If my flight arrived after that incident, no telling where my plane would have been diverted and no matter where it was, it would have cost me several hundred dollars to get to my hotel. That was indeed a close call!The two extra night lodging I had to pay out of my own pocket was £210 and that was absurd because the room at the Novotel West was nothing special! I say that because in all my years of traveling, I had no place to put my underwear, socks and other small items except to keep them in my suitcase.
I did not buy any DVDs but did buy some classical music CDs that were priced between £4 and £8 and a fairly new recording of Handel;s MESSIAH with Sir Colin Davis and the London Symphony Orchestra for £13. I bought all the CDs at ZAVVI at Piccadelli Circus and I was amazed at their large selections of movies and music.
I had posted four images I had shot in London at the Professional Photographers website and if you like to see them, go here http://www.pphawaii.org. The images are in the Members Gallery under my name on Page ten.
=Claude
Posted by Bernard Tonks (Member # 809) on 01-29-2008, 04:57 AM:
The multiplex cinema in Piccadilly Circus is now actually listed as the the Cineworld, Shaftsbury Avenue with 7 screens. It was constructed by Cineplex-Odeon within the shell of the very old London Pavilion, opened as a music hall theatre in 1885, later modernised with a stalls and two circles. Changed to cinema use in 1934 by United Artists. I watched many a film there in the upper circle, and the loved the atmosphere and surroundings in this historic theatre.
The projection room was equipped with three Westar projectors and Westrex sound with Peerless carbon lamps. I also was shown back stage which still had the original hand lines in situ.
Full history with some pictures: http://www.arthurlloyd.co.uk/Pavilion.htm
I don't think you missed anything special with the Trocadero / Shaftsbury Avenue multiplex cinema, except for perhaps one auditorium which also has a balcony! The Vue (ex: Warner), Leicester Square, would have been a better experience.
Glad you enjoyed your trip to London.
Powered by Infopop Corporation
UBB.classicTM
6.3.1.2