a question about London airports

[ritaxis]

If you were going to fly in and out of London, and the price was the same either way you did it, would you choose Gatwick or Stansted? Those are the choices, and there is apparently only a fifteen minute difference in arrival or departure.

The passenger has no special destination in London -- he's jusgt messing around on his way to California and back to Prague.

(our cheapest places to fly in and out of appeared to be London, Shannon, Dublin, Nice, Manchester, Krakow, and Malaga, in that order. The easiest places for him to get to, he said, were London and Krakow. London's cheaper than Krakow. Also probably simpler to wander in for a few days, though also probably more expensive to hang around in)

on another front, I have deadheaded the front roses. The first bloon is just about over.

Comments

[ellarien]

I'd probably plump for Gatwick because it's familiar, and also slightly closer to central London -- 30 minutes on the train (if you get the express rather than the slightly cheaper and slower commuter train) rather than 45. I've never used Stansted, but I suspect that being smaller and newer it may be slightly easier to deal with.

I'd probably vote for Gatwick

[dragonet2.livejournal.com]

for the same reasons.

And BTW, your assessment of me having a Mast year for cherries appears to be playing out. Our weather has been perfect, enough rain, no harsh freezes, it's been a bit chilly, which has delayed most things' ripening by about two weeks.

The tiny cherries are getting heavy. I'm already organizing a hen party to pick cherries (one of the gals I'm inviting is well over 6 feet tall...).

I used the last of the 2006 cherries about two months ago after Dr. P did a freezer inventory and found them -- putting a half-cup of sugar into the pitted cherries appears to act as a sufficient preservative.

[mjlayman.livejournal.com]

Dublin. They'll do the TSA crap there, much lighter, and he won't have to do it when he gets to the States. Charlie and Feorag carefully did this when they came to the US recently. Contact Charlie here (http://www.antipope.org/charlie/who_am_i/foo.cgi) for more info.

[julesjones]

No personal experience of Gatwick in the last 25 years, but my impression is that it is generally better for connections into London, both in frequency and in price. You can use http://www.nationalrail.co.uk to check the train timetables and ticket prices. The train fares vary wildly depending on whether you get an apex, off-peak or full fare. Apex fares are not suitable for someone arriving by air, because they are valid only for a specific train, but off-peak is typically any train on a route after around 9.30 am.

[julesjones]

And the National Express website for the coaches:
http://www.nationalexpress.com/

It's about 1:40 travel time from Stansted, 17 pounds for an open return, and a bus every 20 minutes. I can't get a sensible answer out of the website for Gatwick, as it seems to think there are no direct coaches, which I find highly unlikely.

[papersky.livejournal.com]

I don't know what all these other people are smoking.

Stansted has excellent and frequent trains to London (and Cambridge) and it's small and easy to deal with. Every single time I've been to Gatwick in my entire life it's been hell on wheels, and the trains to Victoria have been overcrowded and running late. Also, there aren't any buses, unless they've just got some. I've just paid $200 to avoid Gatwick this summer.

[heleninwales.livejournal.com]

I can't speak for the London airports at all, never having used them, but Dublin is a pleasant airport and there are good train and bus connections into the city centre. I didn't get chance to do any sightseeing when I passed through on the way to Octocon, but I would like to go back some time.

I wouldn't totally rule out Manchester either if he wants to have a look at a typical British city that is not London. It also provides easy access to the Lake District and Peak District if he has a few days to kill.