This web site may be of interest to the visitor to London. The
Underground and taxis are discussed.

http://hometown.aol.com/nerdbird1/LondonNYC.html

On Mon, 30 Jul 2007, Nerdbird wrote:

Quite entertaining!

Other things that spring to mind (from my modest knowledge of London and
thoroughly scanty knowledge of NYC):

- You don't mention buses; i think they're cheaper and a lot more dense
and frequent in London, more geared towards local trips than commuting.

- What are New York's night buses like?

- The Underground is mostly more frequent than the Subway, but the trains
are shorter, so the capacity of a line is less (i think); that and the
narrower, lower carriages means they're even more densely packed than in
New York (or rather, are packed to capacity for longer - i've been on the
Lexington Avenue line through the financial district in the peak, and
that's as bad as anything we have!).

"Tom Anderson" wrote in message
news:Pine.LNX.4.64.0707301825130.7574@urchin.earth.li...

On Mon, 30 Jul 2007 18:47:18 +0100, Tom Anderson
wrote:

Yep not bad.

Graham Harrison wrote:

Michael Hoffman cam.ac.uk> wrote:

Eh? Half FCC train stop at Luton Airport Parkway. Or am I missing the
point?

Peter

"Peter Robinson" gmx.net> wrote in message
news:1i234a1.1wd32xi13ni6mrN%%pmrobinson@gmx.net

You then have to get a shuttle bus, as the railway station isn't
adjacent to the terminal. Strictly speaking, therefore, Luton is no more
rail connected than Heathrow was before 1977.

On Mon, 30 Jul 2007 22:22:52 +0100, Peter Robinson gmx.net>
wrote in <1i234a1.1wd32xi13ni6mrN%%pmrobinson@gmx.net>:

Just the point that you have to take a shuttle bus between the
railway station and the airport, I guess.

Peter Robinson wrote:

Graham Harrison said that all London airports have direct rail links to
the centre, as opposed to NYC where the "rail link" to two airports
involves getting a rail shuttle from the mainline rail station. I was
pointing out that Luton is not any better than that.

Paul Corfield wrote: