Aidan Stanger wrote:
Huge wrote:

Ian Jelf writes:

On the contrary, Paul, please continue to do so and don't allow
the occasional negative comment from someone who knows about 10%
of what you're on about discourage you.

So, your bigotry somehow distorts spacetime and means that people
arriving at St.Pancras *don't* have to drag their suitcases 500
yards in the ****ing rain to wait outside Kings X until the Tube
has cleared sufficiently?

What happened to the ramp down from St.Pancras directly into the
Tube station?

If you mean the Tube exit from the new interim St Pancras, it's
escalators rather than a ramp, and it leads directly to a hole in the
ground that will become the Northern Ticket Hall. There's a report on
the BBC today* that says the government have approved the funding of
this, so it will eventually be provided. Actually the BBC report is a
right mess, failing to distinguish between the Northern Ticket Hall of
the Tube station and a new ticket hall for King's Cross mainline
station, which would enable the grotty single-storey buildings between
the train shed and Euston Road to be removed. Whether that is part of
the £400M plan is not clear.

* http://news.bbc.co.uk/1/hi/england/london/4266559.stm

--
Richard J.
(to e-mail me, swap uk and yon in address)

In message , at 17:06:04 on
Tue, 15 Feb 2005, Aidan Stanger remarked:
What happened to the ramp down from St.Pancras directly into the Tube
station?

It was closed about a year ago when they started refurbishing the old
part of the station. St Pancras is no longer there - the trains depart
from a new concrete and glass monstrosity they've built a five minute
walk (with no cover for bad weather) to the north.
--
Roland Perry

Pete wrote:
I'm heading to the Westminster area of London next week and I have the
option of flying into either Stanstead or Luton. Which airport has the
better rail links to this part of London? By "better" I mean easier/faster
and/or cheaper.

TIA.



I'd choose Luton. The Stansted Express is often crowded, does not have
adequate space for passenger's luggage and the trains are frequently
vandalised by Essex yobs. None of these problems on the Thameslink.

I've also found the wait for baggage longer at Stansted Airport, but I
may just have been unlucky.

On Fri, 11 Feb 2005 14:57:07 +0100, "Pete" wrote:

I'm heading to the Westminster area of London next week and I have the
option of flying into either Stanstead or Luton. Which airport has the
better rail links to this part of London? By "better" I mean easier/faster
and/or cheaper.

TIA.



Stanstead definitely. You also have a very cheap bus service, it's £7
from Stratford (which is a 5 minute train ride from the city). Takes
about an hour during the day (varies on traffic) and no more than 40
minutes in the middle of the night. Runs all day/night too, so you can
make a 6 a.m. flight without any problem.

Solar Penguin" wrote
Yeah - that makes all the difference. The luton shuttle bus makes timing
your journey difficult. Also, there are no "Luton Express" services
(yet),
so you have to use regular trains, and that involves making sure it stops
at
the right station, and whether it's a fast train, or a stopping service
(get
the wrong one, and you've added 20/30 mins to your trip).


But the Stansted Express takes longer to get to London than the all stopping
Luton service and takes twice as long as the MML non stop service

In message , at 08:26:11 on Sat, 19
Feb 2005, informer remarked:

But the Stansted Express takes longer to get to London than the all stopping
Luton service and takes twice as long as the MML non stop service

The Stansted train runs rather more often than the MML.
--
Roland Perry

Roland Perry wrote:
In message , at 08:26:11 on Sat, 19
Feb 2005, informer remarked:

But the Stansted Express takes longer to get to London than the all
stopping
Luton service and takes twice as long as the MML non stop service


The Stansted train runs rather more often than the MML.

But he does have a point about the all-stations service to Luton; it's
not actually faster than the Stansted Express, but at 47 minutes versus
44 or 46 minutes, there's not much of a difference.

I'm still backing Luton :-)

--
Dave Arquati
Imperial College, SW7
www.alwaystouchout.com - Transport projects in London

"Dave Arquati" wrote in message
...

I'm still backing Luton :-)

You are Eric Morecambe AICMFP.

;-)

Ian

Dave Arquati wrote:
But he does have a point about the all-stations service to Luton; it's
not actually faster than the Stansted Express, but at 47 minutes versus
44 or 46 minutes, there's not much of a difference.

But... the bus! What about the bus you have to take to get to Luton
Airport Parkway?

;-)
--
Michael Hoffman

Michael Hoffman wrote:
Dave Arquati wrote:

But he does have a point about the all-stations service to Luton; it's
not actually faster than the Stansted Express, but at 47 minutes
versus 44 or 46 minutes, there's not much of a difference.


But... the bus! What about the bus you have to take to get to Luton
Airport Parkway?

;-)

Actually, it's quite fun standing on the bus winding its way down the
hill and round the roundabouts to the station. Plus anything that's free
can't be that bad... :-)

On a slightly serious note, I've found the shuttle bus to be pretty good
- it runs all day and connects to the night Thameslink trains too, and
there's almost always one waiting to pick up passengers as one doesn't
leave until the one behind arrives.

--
Dave Arquati
Imperial College, SW7
www.alwaystouchout.com - Transport projects in London