Heathrow: The world's least favourite airport
Jul 23rd 2007 | 5:54 am
#91
Guest
Posts: n/a
Re: Heathrow: The world's least favourite airport
On 23 Jul, 01:12, Alan S <[email protected]> wrote:
> On Sun, 22 Jul 2007 08:45:16 -0700, Mel Rowing
> I agree about the latecomers - but not the sleepers.
>
> They are not the problem. The problem is that in all this
> glitzy commercial push no entrepreneurs around the world
> have recognised the need and decided to meet it. There is a
> business opportunity there. I am one of millions of
> transitting passenger who would pay a few dollars for a soft
> couch to sleep on in a dorm-style facility while between
> flights. Something with an alarm or wake-up service to meet
> the flight and a shower available. The only options at the
> moment are the unsuitable seats in the airport or expensive
> Airport Hotels (if one is nearby) which sometimes offer a
> short-stay room. A dorm-style setup offering couches with a
> wake-up service for, say $5-10 per hour, would meet the need
> and make a fortune.
>
> Your lack of empathy for jetlagged people in transit shines
> through. You may be aware that people have crossed time
> zones but you certainly don't understand the effects.
> As to "Why can't they catch up on their sleep whilst they
> are on the aircraft?" Just how much long-distance flying
> across time zones have you done?
Quite a bit with various carriers BA, Qantas, UA, Delta, Cumana (now
there's an experience!) Emirites, El Al, Cathay Pacific all come to
mind. Never Iberia!
> Some airlines try to
> encourage sleeping - Qantas, BA are good at this, but there
> will still be constant movement around the plane, passengers
> disrupting you to go to the loo and a million other
> distractions. Others couldn't give a damn - Iberian are a
> classic example, keeping the lights on and the PA going for
> hours into the flight until they had sold their duty-free
> quota when I crossed the Atlantic with them.
I don't sleep well on aircraft with one exception. I once flew BA from
Bangkok to Heathrow. We boarded around midnight local time had a meal
and bedded down. I put on my earphones, found some orchestral music
and wham!
I woke up as the cabin staff were about to serve breakfast. Best long
distance flight I ever had. I have tried to repeat the conditions ever
since without success. I would add the missus never slept a wink!
We don't do transits either. If I've been on an aircraft more than 3
or 4 hours when it lands I don't get on another for 24 hours at least
more likely 2 or 3 days depending upon circumstances. Nature I think
didn't intend the human frame to endure 20 hours plus dehydrating in a
pressurised cabin starved of oxygen.
I think this might well be the problem. These kids just try to do too
much travelling in one hop. I know hotels can be expensive though
compared with the UK hotels abroad are cheap. However, they tend to
use hostels don't they? I remember last year, against my better
judgement, I flew Heathrow to Anchorage via Chicago. En route via
Chicago became via Chicago and Seattle and a thunderstorm kept us on
the Chicago taxiway for three hours. We eventually arrived in
Anchorage 4-30 a.m. local ready to start a landtour at 9-00 a.m. Never
again! I was like a wet dishcloth for the next two days. I believe in
arriving for a holiday raring to go. Holidays are expensive. The
saving of a hotel bill in Chicago was false economy. Besides I still
haven't seen Chicago!
> On Sun, 22 Jul 2007 08:45:16 -0700, Mel Rowing
> I agree about the latecomers - but not the sleepers.
>
> They are not the problem. The problem is that in all this
> glitzy commercial push no entrepreneurs around the world
> have recognised the need and decided to meet it. There is a
> business opportunity there. I am one of millions of
> transitting passenger who would pay a few dollars for a soft
> couch to sleep on in a dorm-style facility while between
> flights. Something with an alarm or wake-up service to meet
> the flight and a shower available. The only options at the
> moment are the unsuitable seats in the airport or expensive
> Airport Hotels (if one is nearby) which sometimes offer a
> short-stay room. A dorm-style setup offering couches with a
> wake-up service for, say $5-10 per hour, would meet the need
> and make a fortune.
>
> Your lack of empathy for jetlagged people in transit shines
> through. You may be aware that people have crossed time
> zones but you certainly don't understand the effects.
> As to "Why can't they catch up on their sleep whilst they
> are on the aircraft?" Just how much long-distance flying
> across time zones have you done?
Quite a bit with various carriers BA, Qantas, UA, Delta, Cumana (now
there's an experience!) Emirites, El Al, Cathay Pacific all come to
mind. Never Iberia!
> Some airlines try to
> encourage sleeping - Qantas, BA are good at this, but there
> will still be constant movement around the plane, passengers
> disrupting you to go to the loo and a million other
> distractions. Others couldn't give a damn - Iberian are a
> classic example, keeping the lights on and the PA going for
> hours into the flight until they had sold their duty-free
> quota when I crossed the Atlantic with them.
I don't sleep well on aircraft with one exception. I once flew BA from
Bangkok to Heathrow. We boarded around midnight local time had a meal
and bedded down. I put on my earphones, found some orchestral music
and wham!
I woke up as the cabin staff were about to serve breakfast. Best long
distance flight I ever had. I have tried to repeat the conditions ever
since without success. I would add the missus never slept a wink!
We don't do transits either. If I've been on an aircraft more than 3
or 4 hours when it lands I don't get on another for 24 hours at least
more likely 2 or 3 days depending upon circumstances. Nature I think
didn't intend the human frame to endure 20 hours plus dehydrating in a
pressurised cabin starved of oxygen.
I think this might well be the problem. These kids just try to do too
much travelling in one hop. I know hotels can be expensive though
compared with the UK hotels abroad are cheap. However, they tend to
use hostels don't they? I remember last year, against my better
judgement, I flew Heathrow to Anchorage via Chicago. En route via
Chicago became via Chicago and Seattle and a thunderstorm kept us on
the Chicago taxiway for three hours. We eventually arrived in
Anchorage 4-30 a.m. local ready to start a landtour at 9-00 a.m. Never
again! I was like a wet dishcloth for the next two days. I believe in
arriving for a holiday raring to go. Holidays are expensive. The
saving of a hotel bill in Chicago was false economy. Besides I still
haven't seen Chicago!
Jul 23rd 2007 | 6:21 am
#92
Guest
Posts: n/a
Re: Heathrow: The world's least favourite airport
"Iceman" <[email protected]> wrote in message
news:[email protected] ups.com...
> On Jul 23, 11:25 am, The Reid <[email protected]>
> wrote:
>> Following up to Iceman <[email protected]> wrote:
>>
>> >> tell me about it, flying, the quickest and nastiest* way to travel :-(
>>
>> >> *except buses
>>
>> >I'd rather be on a bus than a ferry.
>>
>> ferries are my favourite and buses my least favourite.
>
>
> I've taken Greek Island ferries, the Spain-Morocco ferry, the Hong
> Kong-Macau ferry, the Dover-Calais ferry, and the Staten Island ferry.
Isn't the latter an order of magnitude diffferent to the rest.
If I was making a list of ferries I don't think that I'd include
the Englishtown ferry, which is probably the shortest I've
been on (with a car or without).
tim
news:[email protected] ups.com...
> On Jul 23, 11:25 am, The Reid <[email protected]>
> wrote:
>> Following up to Iceman <[email protected]> wrote:
>>
>> >> tell me about it, flying, the quickest and nastiest* way to travel :-(
>>
>> >> *except buses
>>
>> >I'd rather be on a bus than a ferry.
>>
>> ferries are my favourite and buses my least favourite.
>
>
> I've taken Greek Island ferries, the Spain-Morocco ferry, the Hong
> Kong-Macau ferry, the Dover-Calais ferry, and the Staten Island ferry.
Isn't the latter an order of magnitude diffferent to the rest.
If I was making a list of ferries I don't think that I'd include
the Englishtown ferry, which is probably the shortest I've
been on (with a car or without).
tim
Jul 23rd 2007 | 6:30 am
#93
Guest
Posts: n/a
Re: Heathrow: The world's least favourite airport
On Jul 22, 6:44 am, "John A. Weeks III" <[email protected]> wrote:
> It is a contradiction since Heathrow is no where near the
> bussiest international airport.
and
> The specific claim that Heathrow makes is that they handle
> more international passengers than any other airport, which
> is true
Top logic, that
> But due to a fluke where Heathrow handles
> a lot of international flights
Ha ha ha - I guess it's just a "fluke" that GB is where it is,
right?
> But also consider that LAX has many domestic flights that
> run on routes far longer than many of the international
> flights that originate from Heathrow.
Of course. Difficult to compare the two, which are practically apples
and oranges, at opposite ends of the earth (in so many senses).
LHR is a shithole run by a bunch of doped incompetents and owned by
lazy, corrupt Spaniards (the boss of Ferrovial makes LHR operations
wait when he wants to and his private jet there - ace dictator skills,
there). the staff are lazy and rude, and the place is falling apart.
But it's also pretty much in the centre of the world, being right
between Europe and America, and in an English-speaking country
containing one of the world's three financial hubs. Ye cannae escape
LHR. The demand for the services is so great that the quality could
dwindle to nothing and it would make no difference. Still those
flights from Africa and India will keep pouring their asylum seekers
and shuffling ne'er-do-wells into T2 at 4.30 am, and JFK, Newark and
La Guardia will keep offloading East Coasters into LHR for ever.
That's before you get to Europe and Asia.
> It is a contradiction since Heathrow is no where near the
> bussiest international airport.
and
> The specific claim that Heathrow makes is that they handle
> more international passengers than any other airport, which
> is true
Top logic, that
> But due to a fluke where Heathrow handles
> a lot of international flights
Ha ha ha - I guess it's just a "fluke" that GB is where it is,
right?
> But also consider that LAX has many domestic flights that
> run on routes far longer than many of the international
> flights that originate from Heathrow.
Of course. Difficult to compare the two, which are practically apples
and oranges, at opposite ends of the earth (in so many senses).
LHR is a shithole run by a bunch of doped incompetents and owned by
lazy, corrupt Spaniards (the boss of Ferrovial makes LHR operations
wait when he wants to and his private jet there - ace dictator skills,
there). the staff are lazy and rude, and the place is falling apart.
But it's also pretty much in the centre of the world, being right
between Europe and America, and in an English-speaking country
containing one of the world's three financial hubs. Ye cannae escape
LHR. The demand for the services is so great that the quality could
dwindle to nothing and it would make no difference. Still those
flights from Africa and India will keep pouring their asylum seekers
and shuffling ne'er-do-wells into T2 at 4.30 am, and JFK, Newark and
La Guardia will keep offloading East Coasters into LHR for ever.
That's before you get to Europe and Asia.
Jul 23rd 2007 | 6:34 am
#94
Guest
Posts: n/a
Re: Heathrow: The world's least favourite airport
On Jul 22, 11:22 pm, "TMOliver" <[email protected]> wrote:
> "tim....." <[email protected]> wrote ...
>
>
>
> > They count number of international passangers, and ignore
> > all of the local passangers.
>
> > A not unreasonable thing to do if your claim is busiest
> > *international* airport.
>
> .....But on the other hand, many of the "domestic" flights out of ORD or
> ATL, both "busier" than LHR, travel far greater distances than do many of
> LHR's "International" flights.
Of course. Different georpgraphy. But LHR's competition is CDG,
Frankfurt and Schipol et al, all of which will have similarly high
proportions of international passengers, like most European countries
do, and many SE Asian ones, too. I don't really understand the
comparison with any US airport; it's apples to oranges. Or is it just
a "size" thing?
> "tim....." <[email protected]> wrote ...
>
>
>
> > They count number of international passangers, and ignore
> > all of the local passangers.
>
> > A not unreasonable thing to do if your claim is busiest
> > *international* airport.
>
> .....But on the other hand, many of the "domestic" flights out of ORD or
> ATL, both "busier" than LHR, travel far greater distances than do many of
> LHR's "International" flights.
Of course. Different georpgraphy. But LHR's competition is CDG,
Frankfurt and Schipol et al, all of which will have similarly high
proportions of international passengers, like most European countries
do, and many SE Asian ones, too. I don't really understand the
comparison with any US airport; it's apples to oranges. Or is it just
a "size" thing?
Jul 23rd 2007 | 8:27 am
#95
Guest
Posts: n/a
Re: Heathrow: The world's least favourite airport
On Jul 23, 2:21 pm, "tim....." <[email protected]> wrote:
> "Iceman" <[email protected]> wrote in message
>
> news:[email protected] ups.com...
>
> > On Jul 23, 11:25 am, The Reid <[email protected]>
> > wrote:
> >> Following up to Iceman <[email protected]> wrote:
>
> >> >> tell me about it, flying, the quickest and nastiest* way to travel :-(
>
> >> >> *except buses
>
> >> >I'd rather be on a bus than a ferry.
>
> >> ferries are my favourite and buses my least favourite.
>
> > I've taken Greek Island ferries, the Spain-Morocco ferry, the Hong
> > Kong-Macau ferry, the Dover-Calais ferry, and the Staten Island ferry.
>
> Isn't the latter an order of magnitude diffferent to the rest.
Well, the Hong Kong-Macau ferry is 45 minutes, and the Staten Island
ferry is 25. But we can drop it if you want - I'm just making a point
about it being an unpleasant way to travel.
> If I was making a list of ferries I don't think that I'd include
> the Englishtown ferry, which is probably the shortest I've
> been on (with a car or without).
The Hong Kong Star Ferry connects Hong Kong Island to the mainland -
it takes about five minutes, and I didn't include it. Also the
Bangkok river ferries, which stop about every two minutes.
> "Iceman" <[email protected]> wrote in message
>
> news:[email protected] ups.com...
>
> > On Jul 23, 11:25 am, The Reid <[email protected]>
> > wrote:
> >> Following up to Iceman <[email protected]> wrote:
>
> >> >> tell me about it, flying, the quickest and nastiest* way to travel :-(
>
> >> >> *except buses
>
> >> >I'd rather be on a bus than a ferry.
>
> >> ferries are my favourite and buses my least favourite.
>
> > I've taken Greek Island ferries, the Spain-Morocco ferry, the Hong
> > Kong-Macau ferry, the Dover-Calais ferry, and the Staten Island ferry.
>
> Isn't the latter an order of magnitude diffferent to the rest.
Well, the Hong Kong-Macau ferry is 45 minutes, and the Staten Island
ferry is 25. But we can drop it if you want - I'm just making a point
about it being an unpleasant way to travel.
> If I was making a list of ferries I don't think that I'd include
> the Englishtown ferry, which is probably the shortest I've
> been on (with a car or without).
The Hong Kong Star Ferry connects Hong Kong Island to the mainland -
it takes about five minutes, and I didn't include it. Also the
Bangkok river ferries, which stop about every two minutes.
Jul 23rd 2007 | 8:30 am
#96
Guest
Posts: n/a
Re: Heathrow: The world's least favourite airport
"Martin" <[email protected]> wrote in message
news:[email protected]...
> Maybe you would do better putting up with rude Frenchmen at CDG?
I would pay good money to transit through LHR if it meant avoiding CDG.
Richard
news:[email protected]...
> Maybe you would do better putting up with rude Frenchmen at CDG?
I would pay good money to transit through LHR if it meant avoiding CDG.
Richard
Jul 23rd 2007 | 8:51 am
#97
Guest
Posts: n/a
Re: Heathrow: The world's least favourite airport
On 23 Jul, 21:30, "Richard" <[email protected]> wrote:
> "Martin" <[email protected]> wrote in message
>
> news:[email protected]...
>
> > Maybe you would do better putting up with rude Frenchmen at CDG?
>
> I would pay good money to transit through LHR if it meant avoiding CDG.
>
> Richard
you do pay good money for the experience, thats the problem......
> "Martin" <[email protected]> wrote in message
>
> news:[email protected]...
>
> > Maybe you would do better putting up with rude Frenchmen at CDG?
>
> I would pay good money to transit through LHR if it meant avoiding CDG.
>
> Richard
you do pay good money for the experience, thats the problem......
Jul 23rd 2007 | 9:16 am
#98
Guest
Posts: n/a
Re: Heathrow: The world's least favourite airport
On Mon, 23 Jul 2007 19:21:44 +0100, "tim....." <[email protected]>
wrote:
>
>"Iceman" <[email protected]> wrote in message
>news:[email protected] oups.com...
>> On Jul 23, 11:25 am, The Reid <[email protected]>
>> wrote:
>>> Following up to Iceman <[email protected]> wrote:
>>>
>>> >> tell me about it, flying, the quickest and nastiest* way to travel :-(
>>>
>>> >> *except buses
>>>
>>> >I'd rather be on a bus than a ferry.
>>>
>>> ferries are my favourite and buses my least favourite.
>>
>>
>> I've taken Greek Island ferries, the Spain-Morocco ferry, the Hong
>> Kong-Macau ferry, the Dover-Calais ferry, and the Staten Island ferry.
>
>Isn't the latter an order of magnitude diffferent to the rest.
>
>If I was making a list of ferries I don't think that I'd include
>the Englishtown ferry, which is probably the shortest I've
>been on (with a car or without).
The ferry at Maasluis is probably the shortest car ferry route I have used.
--
Martin
wrote:
>
>"Iceman" <[email protected]> wrote in message
>news:[email protected] oups.com...
>> On Jul 23, 11:25 am, The Reid <[email protected]>
>> wrote:
>>> Following up to Iceman <[email protected]> wrote:
>>>
>>> >> tell me about it, flying, the quickest and nastiest* way to travel :-(
>>>
>>> >> *except buses
>>>
>>> >I'd rather be on a bus than a ferry.
>>>
>>> ferries are my favourite and buses my least favourite.
>>
>>
>> I've taken Greek Island ferries, the Spain-Morocco ferry, the Hong
>> Kong-Macau ferry, the Dover-Calais ferry, and the Staten Island ferry.
>
>Isn't the latter an order of magnitude diffferent to the rest.
>
>If I was making a list of ferries I don't think that I'd include
>the Englishtown ferry, which is probably the shortest I've
>been on (with a car or without).
The ferry at Maasluis is probably the shortest car ferry route I have used.
--
Martin
Jul 23rd 2007 | 9:27 am
#99
Guest
Posts: n/a
Re: Heathrow: The world's least favourite airport
In article <[email protected]>, "Richard" <[email protected]>
wrote:
> "Martin" <[email protected]> wrote in message
> news:[email protected]...
>
> > Maybe you would do better putting up with rude Frenchmen at CDG?
>
> I would pay good money to transit through LHR if it meant avoiding CDG.
Yes, LHR, while far from being my favorite, is several cuts above CDG!
--
Mary, biblioholic
bib-li-o-hol-ism : the habitual longing to purchase, read, store,
admire, and consume books in excess.
http://www.airstreamcomm.net/~erilarlo
wrote:
> "Martin" <[email protected]> wrote in message
> news:[email protected]...
>
> > Maybe you would do better putting up with rude Frenchmen at CDG?
>
> I would pay good money to transit through LHR if it meant avoiding CDG.
Yes, LHR, while far from being my favorite, is several cuts above CDG!
--
Mary, biblioholic
bib-li-o-hol-ism : the habitual longing to purchase, read, store,
admire, and consume books in excess.
http://www.airstreamcomm.net/~erilarlo
Jul 23rd 2007 | 9:29 am
#100
Guest
Posts: n/a
Re: Heathrow: The world's least favourite airport
On Mon, 23 Jul 2007 16:27:14 -0500, erilar <[email protected]> wrote:
>In article <[email protected]>, "Richard" <[email protected]>
>wrote:
>
>> "Martin" <[email protected]> wrote in message
>> news:[email protected]...
>>
>> > Maybe you would do better putting up with rude Frenchmen at CDG?
>>
>> I would pay good money to transit through LHR if it meant avoiding CDG.
>
>Yes, LHR, while far from being my favorite, is several cuts above CDG!
Have you thought of staying at home? I must have been through CDG and LHR dozens
of times without incident, why do they always pick on you?
--
Martin
>In article <[email protected]>, "Richard" <[email protected]>
>wrote:
>
>> "Martin" <[email protected]> wrote in message
>> news:[email protected]...
>>
>> > Maybe you would do better putting up with rude Frenchmen at CDG?
>>
>> I would pay good money to transit through LHR if it meant avoiding CDG.
>
>Yes, LHR, while far from being my favorite, is several cuts above CDG!
Have you thought of staying at home? I must have been through CDG and LHR dozens
of times without incident, why do they always pick on you?
--
Martin
Jul 23rd 2007 | 9:36 am
#101
Guest
Posts: n/a
Re: Heathrow: The world's least favourite airport
On Mon, 23 Jul 2007 10:54:07 -0700, Mel Rowing
<[email protected]> wrote:
>On 23 Jul, 01:12, Alan S <[email protected]> wrote:
>> On Sun, 22 Jul 2007 08:45:16 -0700, Mel Rowing
>
>> I agree about the latecomers - but not the sleepers.
>>
>> They are not the problem. The problem is that in all this
>> glitzy commercial push no entrepreneurs around the world
>> have recognised the need and decided to meet it. There is a
>> business opportunity there. I am one of millions of
>> transitting passenger who would pay a few dollars for a soft
>> couch to sleep on in a dorm-style facility while between
>> flights. Something with an alarm or wake-up service to meet
>> the flight and a shower available. The only options at the
>> moment are the unsuitable seats in the airport or expensive
>> Airport Hotels (if one is nearby) which sometimes offer a
>> short-stay room. A dorm-style setup offering couches with a
>> wake-up service for, say $5-10 per hour, would meet the need
>> and make a fortune.
>>
>> Your lack of empathy for jetlagged people in transit shines
>> through. You may be aware that people have crossed time
>> zones but you certainly don't understand the effects.
>
>> As to "Why can't they catch up on their sleep whilst they
>> are on the aircraft?" Just how much long-distance flying
>> across time zones have you done?
>
>Quite a bit with various carriers BA, Qantas, UA, Delta, Cumana (now
>there's an experience!) Emirites, El Al, Cathay Pacific all come to
>mind. Never Iberia!
>
>> Some airlines try to
>> encourage sleeping - Qantas, BA are good at this, but there
>> will still be constant movement around the plane, passengers
>> disrupting you to go to the loo and a million other
>> distractions. Others couldn't give a damn - Iberian are a
>> classic example, keeping the lights on and the PA going for
>> hours into the flight until they had sold their duty-free
>> quota when I crossed the Atlantic with them.
>
>I don't sleep well on aircraft with one exception. I once flew BA from
>Bangkok to Heathrow. We boarded around midnight local time had a meal
>and bedded down. I put on my earphones, found some orchestral music
>and wham!
>I woke up as the cabin staff were about to serve breakfast. Best long
>distance flight I ever had. I have tried to repeat the conditions ever
>since without success. I would add the missus never slept a wink!
>
>We don't do transits either. If I've been on an aircraft more than 3
>or 4 hours when it lands I don't get on another for 24 hours at least
>more likely 2 or 3 days depending upon circumstances. Nature I think
>didn't intend the human frame to endure 20 hours plus dehydrating in a
>pressurised cabin starved of oxygen.
>
>I think this might well be the problem. These kids just try to do too
>much travelling in one hop. I know hotels can be expensive though
>compared with the UK hotels abroad are cheap. However, they tend to
>use hostels don't they? I remember last year, against my better
>judgement, I flew Heathrow to Anchorage via Chicago. En route via
>Chicago became via Chicago and Seattle and a thunderstorm kept us on
>the Chicago taxiway for three hours. We eventually arrived in
>Anchorage 4-30 a.m. local ready to start a landtour at 9-00 a.m. Never
>again! I was like a wet dishcloth for the next two days. I believe in
>arriving for a holiday raring to go. Holidays are expensive. The
>saving of a hotel bill in Chicago was false economy. Besides I still
>haven't seen Chicago!
>
>
It's not always a matter of hotel bills. When I travel, I
pack a lot into a few months. If I take an overnight instead
of a 2-5 hour transit - that's an extra day lost to mucking
about in airports.
Additionally many rtw tickets limit total stopovers and
define a stopover as any place you stay more than 24 hours.
When there may only be one flight in from your source and
out to your destination, staying in a hotel changes a 3 hour
transit to a 27 hour stopover. That was exactly the position
last year when I flew from Singapore to Istanbul via
Bahrein. I chose to have a long day (woke four hours before
departure, nine hr flight, three hour transit, four hour
flight, one hour to hotel) of flying and airports and
enjoyed the extra day that allowed me in Istanbul.
Life is more complex than the simplistic view we get of
other people from the outside looking in. We each have
different likes and dislikes.
My particular dislike has slowly become the TSA:-)
Cheers, Alan, Australia
--
http://loraltraveloz.blogspot.com/
latest: Mossman Gorge in the Daintree Rainforest
http://loraldiabetes.blogspot.com/
latest: Self-Testing and Type 2 Management
<[email protected]> wrote:
>On 23 Jul, 01:12, Alan S <[email protected]> wrote:
>> On Sun, 22 Jul 2007 08:45:16 -0700, Mel Rowing
>
>> I agree about the latecomers - but not the sleepers.
>>
>> They are not the problem. The problem is that in all this
>> glitzy commercial push no entrepreneurs around the world
>> have recognised the need and decided to meet it. There is a
>> business opportunity there. I am one of millions of
>> transitting passenger who would pay a few dollars for a soft
>> couch to sleep on in a dorm-style facility while between
>> flights. Something with an alarm or wake-up service to meet
>> the flight and a shower available. The only options at the
>> moment are the unsuitable seats in the airport or expensive
>> Airport Hotels (if one is nearby) which sometimes offer a
>> short-stay room. A dorm-style setup offering couches with a
>> wake-up service for, say $5-10 per hour, would meet the need
>> and make a fortune.
>>
>> Your lack of empathy for jetlagged people in transit shines
>> through. You may be aware that people have crossed time
>> zones but you certainly don't understand the effects.
>
>> As to "Why can't they catch up on their sleep whilst they
>> are on the aircraft?" Just how much long-distance flying
>> across time zones have you done?
>
>Quite a bit with various carriers BA, Qantas, UA, Delta, Cumana (now
>there's an experience!) Emirites, El Al, Cathay Pacific all come to
>mind. Never Iberia!
>
>> Some airlines try to
>> encourage sleeping - Qantas, BA are good at this, but there
>> will still be constant movement around the plane, passengers
>> disrupting you to go to the loo and a million other
>> distractions. Others couldn't give a damn - Iberian are a
>> classic example, keeping the lights on and the PA going for
>> hours into the flight until they had sold their duty-free
>> quota when I crossed the Atlantic with them.
>
>I don't sleep well on aircraft with one exception. I once flew BA from
>Bangkok to Heathrow. We boarded around midnight local time had a meal
>and bedded down. I put on my earphones, found some orchestral music
>and wham!
>I woke up as the cabin staff were about to serve breakfast. Best long
>distance flight I ever had. I have tried to repeat the conditions ever
>since without success. I would add the missus never slept a wink!
>
>We don't do transits either. If I've been on an aircraft more than 3
>or 4 hours when it lands I don't get on another for 24 hours at least
>more likely 2 or 3 days depending upon circumstances. Nature I think
>didn't intend the human frame to endure 20 hours plus dehydrating in a
>pressurised cabin starved of oxygen.
>
>I think this might well be the problem. These kids just try to do too
>much travelling in one hop. I know hotels can be expensive though
>compared with the UK hotels abroad are cheap. However, they tend to
>use hostels don't they? I remember last year, against my better
>judgement, I flew Heathrow to Anchorage via Chicago. En route via
>Chicago became via Chicago and Seattle and a thunderstorm kept us on
>the Chicago taxiway for three hours. We eventually arrived in
>Anchorage 4-30 a.m. local ready to start a landtour at 9-00 a.m. Never
>again! I was like a wet dishcloth for the next two days. I believe in
>arriving for a holiday raring to go. Holidays are expensive. The
>saving of a hotel bill in Chicago was false economy. Besides I still
>haven't seen Chicago!
>
>
It's not always a matter of hotel bills. When I travel, I
pack a lot into a few months. If I take an overnight instead
of a 2-5 hour transit - that's an extra day lost to mucking
about in airports.
Additionally many rtw tickets limit total stopovers and
define a stopover as any place you stay more than 24 hours.
When there may only be one flight in from your source and
out to your destination, staying in a hotel changes a 3 hour
transit to a 27 hour stopover. That was exactly the position
last year when I flew from Singapore to Istanbul via
Bahrein. I chose to have a long day (woke four hours before
departure, nine hr flight, three hour transit, four hour
flight, one hour to hotel) of flying and airports and
enjoyed the extra day that allowed me in Istanbul.
Life is more complex than the simplistic view we get of
other people from the outside looking in. We each have
different likes and dislikes.
My particular dislike has slowly become the TSA:-)
Cheers, Alan, Australia
--
http://loraltraveloz.blogspot.com/
latest: Mossman Gorge in the Daintree Rainforest
http://loraldiabetes.blogspot.com/
latest: Self-Testing and Type 2 Management
Jul 23rd 2007 | 9:58 am
#102
Guest
Posts: n/a
Re: Heathrow: The world's least favourite airport
"Martin" <[email protected]> wrote in message
news:[email protected]...
> On Mon, 23 Jul 2007 19:21:44 +0100, "tim....." <[email protected]>
> wrote:
>
>>
>>"Iceman" <[email protected]> wrote in message
>>news:[email protected] roups.com...
>>> On Jul 23, 11:25 am, The Reid <[email protected]>
>>> wrote:
>>>> Following up to Iceman <[email protected]> wrote:
>>>>
>>>> >> tell me about it, flying, the quickest and nastiest* way to travel
>>>> >> :-(
>>>>
>>>> >> *except buses
>>>>
>>>> >I'd rather be on a bus than a ferry.
>>>>
>>>> ferries are my favourite and buses my least favourite.
>>>
>>>
>>> I've taken Greek Island ferries, the Spain-Morocco ferry, the Hong
>>> Kong-Macau ferry, the Dover-Calais ferry, and the Staten Island ferry.
>>
>>Isn't the latter an order of magnitude diffferent to the rest.
>>
>>If I was making a list of ferries I don't think that I'd include
>>the Englishtown ferry, which is probably the shortest I've
>>been on (with a car or without).
>
> The ferry at Maasluis is probably the shortest car ferry route I have
> used.
Looks to be about 500 metres.
Englishtown is approx 120 (so that's my best try for a car ferry).
But my best try for shortest passenger ferry is accross the river
at Turku:
http://www.turku.fi/Public/default.a...0&nodeidÂ11
78 metres. I couldn't be bothered to wait for it, it's only a few
hundres metres along the river from a bridge!
tim
news:[email protected]...
> On Mon, 23 Jul 2007 19:21:44 +0100, "tim....." <[email protected]>
> wrote:
>
>>
>>"Iceman" <[email protected]> wrote in message
>>news:[email protected] roups.com...
>>> On Jul 23, 11:25 am, The Reid <[email protected]>
>>> wrote:
>>>> Following up to Iceman <[email protected]> wrote:
>>>>
>>>> >> tell me about it, flying, the quickest and nastiest* way to travel
>>>> >> :-(
>>>>
>>>> >> *except buses
>>>>
>>>> >I'd rather be on a bus than a ferry.
>>>>
>>>> ferries are my favourite and buses my least favourite.
>>>
>>>
>>> I've taken Greek Island ferries, the Spain-Morocco ferry, the Hong
>>> Kong-Macau ferry, the Dover-Calais ferry, and the Staten Island ferry.
>>
>>Isn't the latter an order of magnitude diffferent to the rest.
>>
>>If I was making a list of ferries I don't think that I'd include
>>the Englishtown ferry, which is probably the shortest I've
>>been on (with a car or without).
>
> The ferry at Maasluis is probably the shortest car ferry route I have
> used.
Looks to be about 500 metres.
Englishtown is approx 120 (so that's my best try for a car ferry).
But my best try for shortest passenger ferry is accross the river
at Turku:
http://www.turku.fi/Public/default.a...0&nodeidÂ11
78 metres. I couldn't be bothered to wait for it, it's only a few
hundres metres along the river from a bridge!
tim
Jul 23rd 2007 | 10:05 am
#103
Guest
Posts: n/a
Re: Heathrow: The world's least favourite airport
On 23 Jul, 22:36, Alan S <[email protected]> wrote:
> On Mon, 23 Jul 2007 10:54:07 -0700, Mel Rowing
> Additionally many rtw tickets limit total stopovers and
> define a stopover as any place you stay more than 24 hours.
> When there may only be one flight in from your source and
> out to your destination, staying in a hotel changes a 3 hour
> transit to a 27 hour stopover. That was exactly the position
> last year when I flew from Singapore to Istanbul via
> Bahrein. I chose to have a long day (woke four hours before
> departure, nine hr flight, three hour transit, four hour
> flight, one hour to hotel) of flying and airports and
> enjoyed the extra day that allowed me in Istanbul.
Yeah but if you use the national carrier of your transit country or
the carrier's hub in the States then they generally allow you one free
stopover. When I talk of stopover I'm usually talking 3 days that cost
me no more than the hotel bill plus transfer to and from the airport.
I fancy that, unlike you, I travel the world more sedately. I probably
arrive in better condition too!
I would suggest you try it!
> On Mon, 23 Jul 2007 10:54:07 -0700, Mel Rowing
> Additionally many rtw tickets limit total stopovers and
> define a stopover as any place you stay more than 24 hours.
> When there may only be one flight in from your source and
> out to your destination, staying in a hotel changes a 3 hour
> transit to a 27 hour stopover. That was exactly the position
> last year when I flew from Singapore to Istanbul via
> Bahrein. I chose to have a long day (woke four hours before
> departure, nine hr flight, three hour transit, four hour
> flight, one hour to hotel) of flying and airports and
> enjoyed the extra day that allowed me in Istanbul.
Yeah but if you use the national carrier of your transit country or
the carrier's hub in the States then they generally allow you one free
stopover. When I talk of stopover I'm usually talking 3 days that cost
me no more than the hotel bill plus transfer to and from the airport.
I fancy that, unlike you, I travel the world more sedately. I probably
arrive in better condition too!
I would suggest you try it!
Jul 23rd 2007 | 10:16 am
#104
Guest
Posts: n/a
Re: Heathrow: The world's least favourite airport
On Sat, 21 Jul 2007 16:22:49 -0700, NotABushSupporter <[email protected]>
wrote:
>>>Airlines argue that BAA, which is also facing an inquiry into whether
>>>its monopoly of London's three airports should be broken, has already
>>>made enough money to fund the required investment. BAA made profits of
>>>£620m last year.
>>
>>
>> Thanks in part to cluttering up its concourses with retail space. According
>> to the website, there are eleven branches of Boots, four car outlets, a
>> software retailer, a "free-standing futuristic hairdressing capsule", a
>> bookmakers, three manicurists, thirteen WHSmiths and at least fifty
>> cafés/restaurants.
>
>Do you think BAA made over 600 million pounds from leasing space to the
> establishments you just named?
>
>Surely most of the money did not come from there. I doubt WHSmith is
>paying millions of pounds per store in rent.
Ten years ago, BAA was listed as a retail stock, not a transport one.
BAA makes nearly all its money from retail and hotels.
In large part, this is because landing fees are regulated (and low)
--
cheers
matt
wrote:
>>>Airlines argue that BAA, which is also facing an inquiry into whether
>>>its monopoly of London's three airports should be broken, has already
>>>made enough money to fund the required investment. BAA made profits of
>>>£620m last year.
>>
>>
>> Thanks in part to cluttering up its concourses with retail space. According
>> to the website, there are eleven branches of Boots, four car outlets, a
>> software retailer, a "free-standing futuristic hairdressing capsule", a
>> bookmakers, three manicurists, thirteen WHSmiths and at least fifty
>> cafés/restaurants.
>
>Do you think BAA made over 600 million pounds from leasing space to the
> establishments you just named?
>
>Surely most of the money did not come from there. I doubt WHSmith is
>paying millions of pounds per store in rent.
Ten years ago, BAA was listed as a retail stock, not a transport one.
BAA makes nearly all its money from retail and hotels.
In large part, this is because landing fees are regulated (and low)
--
cheers
matt
Jul 23rd 2007 | 10:25 am
#105
Guest
Posts: n/a
Re: Heathrow: The world's least favourite airport
"tim....." <[email protected]> skrev i meddelandet
news:[email protected]...
>
> "Martin" <[email protected]> wrote in message
> news:[email protected]...
>> On Mon, 23 Jul 2007 19:21:44 +0100, "tim....."
>> <[email protected]>
>> wrote:
>>
>>>
>>>"Iceman" <[email protected]> wrote in message
>>>news:[email protected] groups.com...
>>>> On Jul 23, 11:25 am, The Reid <[email protected]>
>>>> wrote:
>>>>> Following up to Iceman <[email protected]> wrote:
>>>>>
>>>>> >> tell me about it, flying, the quickest and nastiest* way to travel
>>>>> >> :-(
>>>>>
>>>>> >> *except buses
>>>>>
>>>>> >I'd rather be on a bus than a ferry.
>>>>>
>>>>> ferries are my favourite and buses my least favourite.
>>>>
>>>>
>>>> I've taken Greek Island ferries, the Spain-Morocco ferry, the Hong
>>>> Kong-Macau ferry, the Dover-Calais ferry, and the Staten Island ferry.
>>>
>>>Isn't the latter an order of magnitude diffferent to the rest.
>>>
>>>If I was making a list of ferries I don't think that I'd include
>>>the Englishtown ferry, which is probably the shortest I've
>>>been on (with a car or without).
>>
>> The ferry at Maasluis is probably the shortest car ferry route I have
>> used.
>
> Looks to be about 500 metres.
>
> Englishtown is approx 120 (so that's my best try for a car ferry).
>
> But my best try for shortest passenger ferry is accross the river
> at Turku:
>
> http://www.turku.fi/Public/default.a...0&nodeidÂ11
>
> 78 metres. I couldn't be bothered to wait for it, it's only a few
> hundres metres along the river from a bridge!
> tim
The ferry "Lina" over Göta canal in Töreboda is considered the shortest in
Sweden. I don't have the size of the canal but it's less than 10m and as
they say the trip is 15-20sec
http://www.dalsland.se/templates/article____3376.aspx
VÀgverket (road department) http://farjerederiet.se/
operates 38 roadferry routes and shortest seem to be the HögsÀterleden
being 75m long only. Longest is 5000m and with one exception they're all
free of charge being considered as road connections.
news:[email protected]...
>
> "Martin" <[email protected]> wrote in message
> news:[email protected]...
>> On Mon, 23 Jul 2007 19:21:44 +0100, "tim....."
>> <[email protected]>
>> wrote:
>>
>>>
>>>"Iceman" <[email protected]> wrote in message
>>>news:[email protected] groups.com...
>>>> On Jul 23, 11:25 am, The Reid <[email protected]>
>>>> wrote:
>>>>> Following up to Iceman <[email protected]> wrote:
>>>>>
>>>>> >> tell me about it, flying, the quickest and nastiest* way to travel
>>>>> >> :-(
>>>>>
>>>>> >> *except buses
>>>>>
>>>>> >I'd rather be on a bus than a ferry.
>>>>>
>>>>> ferries are my favourite and buses my least favourite.
>>>>
>>>>
>>>> I've taken Greek Island ferries, the Spain-Morocco ferry, the Hong
>>>> Kong-Macau ferry, the Dover-Calais ferry, and the Staten Island ferry.
>>>
>>>Isn't the latter an order of magnitude diffferent to the rest.
>>>
>>>If I was making a list of ferries I don't think that I'd include
>>>the Englishtown ferry, which is probably the shortest I've
>>>been on (with a car or without).
>>
>> The ferry at Maasluis is probably the shortest car ferry route I have
>> used.
>
> Looks to be about 500 metres.
>
> Englishtown is approx 120 (so that's my best try for a car ferry).
>
> But my best try for shortest passenger ferry is accross the river
> at Turku:
>
> http://www.turku.fi/Public/default.a...0&nodeidÂ11
>
> 78 metres. I couldn't be bothered to wait for it, it's only a few
> hundres metres along the river from a bridge!
> tim
The ferry "Lina" over Göta canal in Töreboda is considered the shortest in
Sweden. I don't have the size of the canal but it's less than 10m and as
they say the trip is 15-20sec
http://www.dalsland.se/templates/article____3376.aspx
VÀgverket (road department) http://farjerederiet.se/
operates 38 roadferry routes and shortest seem to be the HögsÀterleden
being 75m long only. Longest is 5000m and with one exception they're all
free of charge being considered as road connections.
