3 ms·

It's a pretty extensive system and the pretty new Elizabeth Line is great. But if you take something like the Piccadilly Line in from the airport, you probably

by ghaff 9mo ago

It's a pretty extensive system and the pretty new Elizabeth Line is great. But if you take something like the Piccadilly Line in from the airport, you probably shouldn't have a lot of luggage because a lot of stations just have stairs and platforms are often at a significant offset from the underground cars. (The double decker busses also work pretty well although they're not generally my default.)

zabzonk 9mo ago
> a lot of stations just have stairs Very few, if any. They may not have escalators (Covent garden, for eg., but no-one in their right mind uses that - just use Leicester Square and walk on the street) but there are almost always ways of getting up to the street, and assistance is signposted for people with problems. > platforms are often at a significant offset from the underground cars Not sure what you mean here - mind the gap? Typically less on the Piccadilly than some other lines - Bank on the Central is particularly scary. Based on living 30-odd years in London, most of it using the Piccadilly line on my daily commute and to get to LHR. Sounding like a TfL groupie here, but it is a pretty good transit system, given geographic and budgetary constraints.
- ghaff 9mo ago
  It's not just the gap. The platform can also be a somewhat significant step up from the car. Normally not a big deal but a couple years back I had both real dress clothing and clothes for a long walk in my luggage on a fairly long trip overall. Agree that the Underground is good in general. I've used it a lot. That particular trip was just a case of having heavier luggage than I usually carry and I should have handled things differently.
matt-p 9mo ago
The Piccadilly Line was opened in 1906 for gods sake, forgive them for not catering to people with 3 suitcases very well! That's part of the reason we built the Elizabeth Line, to enable a better transport option for people coming into heathrow.
- inglor_cz 9mo ago
  It is interesting how infrastructure silently reflects society of its time. In 1906, people travelling with three suitcases would likely have servants carrying them, and no one cared particularly about comfort of servants.
  - matt-p 9mo ago
    I'm not sure they'd of gotten the tube at all, unless perhaps to connect to a mainline station for a trip to the country? I still feel it more likely they'd of been driven, either by horse drawn or maybe even car (at least to the station) even in 1906.
    - inglor_cz 9mo ago
      I remember some rather old photos with very well-dressed people waiting for the tube... so probably "it depends". Compared to horse-drawn carriages, the tube was fast and not prone to traffic jams.
      - scoot 9mo ago
        Most people of that era were "very well-dressed" relative to their wealth compared to today's "pyjamas and slippers to go to the local shop" level of couture, so I'm not to sure how much you can read into that.
        inglor_cz 9mo ago
        relative to their wealth But total wealth was a lot lower than today, while clothes were much more expensive relative to the average income than today. Many people wore their best clothes on Sundays only, and street photos from the same period show that an average person was dressed rather simply. I don't even think that the tube was affordable to average working class public. When I read historic accounts from much later (the 1930s), they mention that fare on public transport was expensive enough that you had to choose between a breakfast and a ride.

by ghaff 9mo ago

zabzonk 9mo ago

> a lot of stations just have stairs Very few, if any. They may not have escalators (Covent garden, for eg., but no-one in their right mind uses that - just use Leicester Square and walk on the street) but there are almost always ways of getting up to the street, and assistance is signposted for people with problems. > platforms are often at a significant offset from the underground cars Not sure what you mean here - mind the gap? Typically less on the Piccadilly than some other lines - Bank on the Central is particularly scary. Based on living 30-odd years in London, most of it using the Piccadilly line on my daily commute and to get to LHR. Sounding like a TfL groupie here, but it is a pretty good transit system, given geographic and budgetary constraints.

ghaff 9mo ago
It's not just the gap. The platform can also be a somewhat significant step up from the car. Normally not a big deal but a couple years back I had both real dress clothing and clothes for a long walk in my luggage on a fairly long trip overall. Agree that the Underground is good in general. I've used it a lot. That particular trip was just a case of having heavier luggage than I usually carry and I should have handled things differently.

matt-p 9mo ago

The Piccadilly Line was opened in 1906 for gods sake, forgive them for not catering to people with 3 suitcases very well! That's part of the reason we built the Elizabeth Line, to enable a better transport option for people coming into heathrow.

inglor_cz 9mo ago
It is interesting how infrastructure silently reflects society of its time. In 1906, people travelling with three suitcases would likely have servants carrying them, and no one cared particularly about comfort of servants.
- matt-p 9mo ago
  I'm not sure they'd of gotten the tube at all, unless perhaps to connect to a mainline station for a trip to the country? I still feel it more likely they'd of been driven, either by horse drawn or maybe even car (at least to the station) even in 1906.
  - inglor_cz 9mo ago
    I remember some rather old photos with very well-dressed people waiting for the tube... so probably "it depends". Compared to horse-drawn carriages, the tube was fast and not prone to traffic jams.
    - scoot 9mo ago
      Most people of that era were "very well-dressed" relative to their wealth compared to today's "pyjamas and slippers to go to the local shop" level of couture, so I'm not to sure how much you can read into that.
      - inglor_cz 9mo ago
        relative to their wealth But total wealth was a lot lower than today, while clothes were much more expensive relative to the average income than today. Many people wore their best clothes on Sundays only, and street photos from the same period show that an average person was dressed rather simply. I don't even think that the tube was affordable to average working class public. When I read historic accounts from much later (the 1930s), they mention that fare on public transport was expensive enough that you had to choose between a breakfast and a ride.