From Wikivoyage
Jump to navigation Jump to search

Getting this to usable[edit]

How could we do this? Hobbitschuster (talk) 13:59, 12 August 2015 (UTC)[reply]

When does an airport become major?[edit]

Judging from the airports I know, all but the joke ones (like Hahn) and really small obscure airfields (like idk, Kassel-Calden maybe?) have at least some S-Bahn or Streetcar connection if they aren't connected to mainline rail or the subway. Is it really common for major non no-frills airports to not have said connection? What is the biggest airport in Europe or East Asia (China, Japan, South Korea) with neither a mainline rail nor an urban rail connection? Even the US connects most major airports to at least token public transport service (I know LAX isn't), even if it makes no apparent sense and more important routes remain underserved. Hobbitschuster (talk) 21:18, 3 September 2015 (UTC)[reply]

Melbourne Airport is another major airport with no public transport. Jakarta, Edinburgh, Perth, Tegel airport in Berlin and Bristol are examples I've been to that don't have. In South Korea pretty much all minor airports are not connected.
That said, your definition of 'public transport' seems to exclude buses. --Andrewssi2 (talk) 21:41, 3 September 2015 (UTC)[reply]
Ah well sorry, what I wanted to say is that LAX is not connected to urban rail. Most people don't even take buses into account when speaking of realistic transport options. I know this depends a lot on culture demographics and where somebody is, but there is a reason for the often cited "rail bonus". If I have to choose between a 15 minute rail commute and a 10 minute bus commute, I would chose 15 minute rail. It's just a smoother ride and nobody is going to rip up rails willy nilly without years, even decades of lead-up to that. Bus routes change all the time. Tegel will probably be gone "soon", though (unless Ryanair makes it a new destination, of course). And the phrasing explicitly refers to East Asia and Europe. And as to the Korean airports... How long will they be able to survive with KTX competition? Is there much international flying into Korea on airports other than Seoul? Of course there is always the Jeju route, but there have recently been talks of a fixed link to that island as well. Probably pie in the sky, though. There might be a point in here somewhere. Hobbitschuster (talk) 22:40, 3 September 2015 (UTC)[reply]
Edinburgh is now connected to its infamous Tram (light rail) but both Glasgow and Dublin still relies on bus connections. Manila doesn't even allow buses (or jeepneys) to enter the airport environs. BushelCandle (talk) 23:18, 3 September 2015 (UTC)[reply]
South Korea is infamous for an infrastructure spending spree in the 90's that created lots of international airports, many of which have about 2 flights a day. Yangyang is a perfect example of being a fully operational airport with no flights at all right now.
Agree about buses. I have used Melbourne Airport countless times, and always used (expensive) taxi or hire car. The bus, although frequent, just doesn't appeal. Andrewssi2 (talk) 23:43, 3 September 2015 (UTC)[reply]

I would expect that nearly all airports have decent public transport, but rail is definitely an other thing. Helsinki(-Vantaa), which is mentioned as a hub in Europe#Get in, got their rail connection this year, and I suppose it is the only one with rail connection in Finland. For smaller but definitely not "obscure" or "joke ones", see also Tromsø and Rovaniemi, used to get to Finnish Lapland and to Finnmark, respectively. (For the question in the heading, I think airports used as international hubs by other than budget airlines would count as "major", but for the purpose of the rail wording, the line may be elsewhere.) --LPfi (talk) 08:50, 4 September 2015 (UTC)[reply]

I'd say at least airports that have a couple of international flights (that are more than just a hop across some river), and certainly hubs for airlines, can be considered "major". ϒpsilon (talk) 09:17, 4 September 2015 (UTC)[reply]
Malton Airport didn't get passenger rail to downtown Toronto until this year (2015) and it's not a small airport by Canadian standards. Go to some small town with Essential Air Service (US) or similar one-destination service, and there's likely no bus or much of anything else at the airfield - except maybe a hackney cab. A truly remote community like Cartwright (Labrador) might not even have that, although many otherwise next-to-impossible destinations in the Arctic and the Canadian north are primarily (or only) accessible by air. Don't expect to board the blimey Tube directly from some airstrip in the Alaskan bush, the infrastructure routinely won't exist. K7L (talk) 17:29, 4 September 2015 (UTC)[reply]
I know that America and minor airstrips are different tales entirely. But in many (if not necessarily all) cases, a city that has a) an airport with a significant number of international or intercontinental services b) a non-token urban rail system the airport is rather likely to be connected to said urban rail system or mainline rail. At least in Europe. Hobbitschuster (talk) 16:35, 6 September 2015 (UTC)[reply]

Of Taxis and Uber[edit]

Swept in from the pub

I have a conundrum. The small group of cities that I'm a Docent for all have entries for getting around by Taxi - but between my own experiences, the experiences of people I know and yes, even Yelp - old-fashioned taxi services are getting increasingly avoided because of prices, lousy customer service skills and a host of other reasons that I've heard and seen mentioned. The people I know have by and large turned exclusively to services like Uber and Lyft for a host of reasons, among them reliability and price, and even my own experience seems to correlate. Should I start nudging listings for these services into the city listings, or not? L. Challenger (talk) 13:13, 13 August 2018 (UTC)[reply]

I think the general rule should be to shortly note whether the ride hailing services are present or illegal or what the situation is and then move on. Linking to the same WV:Boring chain a trillion billion million times imho smacks of touting. And yes, I dislike the "sharing economy" especially in the arrogance and ignorance many techies exhibit when approaching stuff they want to "disrupt", but that is besides the point... Hobbitschuster (talk) 15:12, 13 August 2018 (UTC)[reply]
I think that we should list app taxis in the Get around section of cities. There is probably less need to provide a link because you can't book the taxi from the web page, and generally I would not recommend these services to those who don't know how to get the app. It is much more useful to say how they are regulated within the city - are there the same checks on vehicles and drivers as regular taxis, are they allowed to use the same routes as regular taxis (e.g. in cities where taxis are allowed to use bus lanes). AlasdairW (talk) 20:39, 13 August 2018 (UTC)[reply]
{{edit conflict}} Here in Finland the law on taxis changed, and now competing call centres have appeared at least in Helsinki. It seems Uber is going to work like any other of those companies (requiring the driver to have a taxi licence). I suppose one should list companies serving a large part of the country in the country article and local companies in city articles, with phone number and links. I do not really buy the "boring" argument, as few taxi companies are an experience in their own right (unless in the "no bad reviews" sense). Leaving out the dominating actor from a list because it is too big doesn't really seem to benefit the traveller (there is of course no need to repeat national phone numbers, reviews or instructions). -LPfi (talk) 20:56, 13 August 2018 (UTC)[reply]
Thanks for the feedback and ideas for this! After examining the options and possibilities, I think the most I will do is indicate that ride hailing services are legal and in frequent use in the cities and simply leave it at that. It bears noting the the home city of Uber and Lyft is in fact not terribly far from myself or the places I docent. L. Challenger (talk) 20:44, 14 August 2018 (UTC)[reply]
L. Challenger - Sorry for coming to this discussion late. For another option, check out what I did with Buffalo#Ride sharing: start by "indicat[ing] that ride hailing services are legal and in frequent use" and then ballpark what you might reasonably expect to pay, and mention any special circumstances e.g. airport pickup restrictions. -- AndreCarrotflower (talk) 20:48, 14 August 2018 (UTC)[reply]
Thanks, Andre Carrotlower, I think implementing the way you handled that and rentals look like something that I should have implemented long before now. :-) L. Challenger (talk) 01:00, 23 August 2018 (UTC)[reply]

What are "sharp practices"?[edit]

for reference Hobbitschuster (talk) 23:18, 12 June 2019 (UTC)[reply]