For those of you who don't know (and I think that's the majority), I went to England over Christmas break for a friend's wedding. My sister and I arrived two days before the wedding, and then the day after the wedding, we took off for a different part of the country to leave the newlyweds alone for a few days. We went from Crewe (south of Manchester) to Oxford by train through Wales (which is absolutely gorgeous, by the way). And, I've decided that I really, really love traveling by train. You get to see everything and really get a feel for how the country looks.
I really wish that the U.S. had a railway system as useful and as extensive as the British system. I know it's a bigger country, and I know we have Amtrak, but it's easily as expensive as flying, and doesn't seem to have the ease or pervasiveness of systems in other places.
Anyway, just thought I'd pop in and say hi! Posts: 4077 | Registered: Jun 2003
| IP: Logged |
posted
Welcome back and glad to hear that you had a good time. I am envious since I've never been to Europe. Posts: 2022 | Registered: Mar 2004
| IP: Logged |
I can tell you didn't spend any time travelling on Network South East. We still have the old slam-door trains from the nineteen thirties, which sound romantic until you see the state of them and realise that at least one person a year dies or is injured because there's nothing to stop you opening the doors while the train is moving.
The British rail system is like Russian Communism in the seventies, on the surface it still looks successful and there are even some good things about it, but underneath it's all falling apart.
Posts: 1528 | Registered: Nov 2004
| IP: Logged |
The British Railway system is far more all inclusive, inexpensive and useful, despite the age, delays and confusion.
The American/Canadian system (I'm assuming that they are similar) is more like an aeroplane on wheels. You are sometimes even assigned a seat, instead of you going to the food car to buy snacks, an attendant wheels food past you (you still have to buy it though).
This is largely due to the much more space that American and Canadian trains have to cover. Hardly anyone commutes on the major train lines, or uses them on even a weekly basis. There are some places (I'm thinking of Toronto's GO train lines) where trains are being used but this is an isolated example.
As a result, trains are a specialty vehicle, are expensive but more comfortable, more exclusive.
Posts: 8473 | Registered: Apr 2003
| IP: Logged |
posted
Adam, I know, and for convenience, I actually prefer flying, but I really liked the scenic aspects of the train.
Bella, I guess I'm more referring to the method of travel and the fact that it's easy (and relatively inexpensive) than any particular problems. I like that there are few places you can't get to, and that trains run all the time. I like that you can see the country as it goes by. I'm sure you're right about problems I didn't see, but from the viewpoint of...well, I hate to say it, but a tourist, I really enjoyed traveling on them.
Posts: 4077 | Registered: Jun 2003
| IP: Logged |
posted
Hey, I'm glad you liked it. I'm just so used to people complaining about our railways (and doing some serious complaining myself) that it came as a shock!
Posts: 1528 | Registered: Nov 2004
| IP: Logged |
posted
Yeah, I understand. The groom (who was British) kept telling us that the trains would be "filled with smelly people, and late, and dull, and expensive..." etc., etc., but in the worst spots it was no worse than any other form of public transportation (just a little crowded), and in the best spots it was substantially better.
Also, it's a darn convenient way to get around the country without having to drive (which would've been amusing, but dangerous and expensive), or fly (which would have been less amusing and dangerous, but less...feasible, I think, and certainly less interesting). If the U.S. had that kind of train system, I would travel all the time. But I really, really like seeing other places.
posted
The only British railway I have experience with is the Tube. It's fast and it's clean, but it's not particularly scenic. I think it would be cool to ride on an old-fashioned train.
quote: We still have the old slam-door trains from the nineteen thirties, which sound romantic until you see the state of them and realise that at least one person a year dies or is injured because there's nothing to stop you opening the doors while the train is moving.
posted
Glad you liked our trains, Megan. The new Virgin ones are quite good, I hear. But how on earth did you go from Crewe to Oxford via Wales? I haven't travelled that part of the West Coast network - I used to go from Oxford to Manchester direct, and I've done the Reading to Cardiff via Bristol route, but I imagine you went to North Wales, right?
Posts: 1550 | Registered: Jun 1999
| IP: Logged |
posted
Well, I wasn't actually aiming for Oxford...I was going to Didcot Parkway (which is 20 minutes or so south of Oxford), and according to the train people I spoke to at the Crewe station, the fastest and easiest way (i.e., the one with the fewest connections) was to go through Newport. It was a very scenic route, although I suppose there might have been faster ways to go, with more connections. Since my sister and I were brand new to the system, we decided to go for the route that allowed for the fewest possibilities for screwing up. I would think that would be South Wales, but I'm really not sure. Also, apparently some track in the middle of the country was having work done on it (so we were told by fellow passengers), so we opted to stick for the same route on the way back, just in case.
Now that I know how the system works, I might be willing to try a more adventurous route next time. Posts: 4077 | Registered: Jun 2003
| IP: Logged |
Printer-friendly view of this topic
![[Smile]](smile.gif)
![[Wave]](graemlins/wave.gif)
![[Big Grin]](biggrin.gif)
But I really, really like seeing other places.
