The UK is located quite far north, much of it being at latitudes of Canada. Being at the north end of the gulf (Mexico) stream keeps it from becoming a glacier. Being around a lot of water keeps the temperatures more uniform than on our tundra here, but its cool. Word has it summer temps. in the 60’s are common. All this ocean also produces a lot of rain, being frequent showers in summer and long cloudy periods with daily precipitation in winter. Morning fog, clouds and mist that burns off by midday is common along coasts (of which there are a lot).
Our experience, probably overall fortunate, has been its usually sunny, often hot and generally nice. There has been the odd shower and a few evening drizzles, but serious rain seems to have always occurred while driving, and then on only a few days. With the weather so screwed up of late its hard to make judgments. In the last few years there has been a drought making many places not look like the green England in the travel literature. We have actually seen crops being sprinkle irrigated.
You will hear descriptions of "bright" and "dull". If its cloudy a lot, you need to differentiate between conditions. Bright would be high clouds where the sky is quite bright, with the overall result being almost like sunshine. Dull would be low clouds/fog, maybe some mist and overall conditions being very grey and depressing.
For sometime there has been decimal coinage in the UK. There are pounds ( £ ) and pence (P)(1/100 pound). There are 1, 5, 10,20 and 50 pence coins, with the 10P being the largest and most common. One quickly acquires a pocket full of these as change. There is also a pound coin, and rumour has it there will be a £ 2 coin.
Bills are £5, £10, £20, £50, £100 although I don’t see many over 20. Bills are different colors and sizes to make them easier for the reading and visually impaired (we should learn).
Pounds seem to spend like dollars except you get only about .6 pound per dollar in exchange. Makes you wonder how those rates are decided. My calibration has been Burger King. Several trips ago on our last day we were visiting a castle in Sterling. We left late and caught dinner at a BK and it came to L7 something for two (like $12) which seemed a bit steep. About two days later we checked the prices at the Rosedale BK for the same things and it came out to within a few pennies of being the same as it was in pounds in the UK.
Changing money is often a source of concern. With the relatively small amounts of money most of us would change, the few dollars one might save on the transactions are not worth any hassle. Generally you will pay a fixed fee to change money, or a worse rate of exchange, or perhaps a mix. Changing travelers checks sometimes gives a better rate. Change as infrequently as possible, while not being too vulnerable to theft with a lot of cash around.
In you plan to pass through an airport, such as Minneapolis, change money there. I’d get $300 or $400 and spread it over two people. That will get you going, pocket money for at least a day or two. Keep your receipt, when you return they will change back a percentage (I think 30%, check) with no charge, and you can be done with it. The plan is to get enough going out so you can have a comfortable amount at the end of your trip and still get it changed back for free. For some reason banks don’t seem to be able to get foreign currency to suburban branches in less than 5 working days, even in this electronic age.
If all else fails there will be a place to change money at the UK airport, in any rail station, and almost any street corner in the west end of London.
A debit card also works well to get cash from a machine. Check on the machines you can use without fees at your local bank. There shouldn't be a conversion fee and the rate of exchange will be current. Always use care to be sure no one sees the pin you are using. Don't relay on cash machines as your only source of money, things can go wrong. Have a 4 digit pin, some foreigh machine won't accept more digits.
Generally, anything that’s very expensive (food, lodging, gifts, petrol) can be bought using a credit card, VISA being widely accepted. This will get you the best rate of exchange and no conversion charge. I’d take dollar travelers checks to cover the trip, since I can get them for no fee from my financial institution, card everything I can and get cash only as needed (often only once in 3 weeks). Turn in the travelers checks when you get home if you won't be needing them. Small restaurants, B&B’s and the like will want cash.
Although I can't understand the wording, some recent information I got from my Chase card hinted at there being a 2% sur charge on foreign exchange billings. If that turns out to be true, a different strategy, and surely a different card, is called for. For 2% you can buy traveler's checks.
European men carry their wallets in the left front pocket, not the rear as is common here. Those guys walking around with their hands in their pockets aren’t (necessarily) dejected or cold, they’re keeping their hand on their wallet to foil the pickpockets. Look into using some sort of money belt or pouch. Carry only enough cash for the day and only one credit card. Keep card and traveler’s check info in a different place. Keep a list of the phone numbers to call for lost/stolen cards, or keep a copy of your card.
It is also possible to get travelers checks in British pounds (at a big bank). It will probably cost you the check fee, but you may be able to avoid changing any money at all.
At any point along a street, for reasons lost in history, the name can change. At any point along a street the numbering scheme can change depending on when the buildings were constructed , who did them, etc. Numbers can go sequentially along one side of the street and continue back on the other. There can be odds on one side, evens on the other. It can be a challenge.
While in the UK I would put a priority on seeing and doing things not available here. There are a couple of areas that stand out.
Big County Homes, Castles, ancient things (Roman ruins, stone circles), gardens.
A number of estates with big, fancy homes have been opened to the public. For a fee, of course.
Most of these were built by the rich and powerful to demonstrate their power, wealth, ego, etc. Circumstances have caused many of the families owning these homes to derive revenue from them to be able to afford to keep them. Others are more interested is making part of the historical legacy available to the public. As a potential supporter of whatever motivation is involved you have to decide if you want to contribute your resources to that end.
There is an organization called the "National Trust". They are devoted to preserving a number of aspects of UK history. These include buildings, lands, castles, etc. You can join the trust, for a fee. You can also buy a pass to a set number of sites operated by the National Trust, thus saving a bit of hassle when arriving. We have found its about a toss-up as to whether a pass or paying individual fees is cheaper.
Many estates have extensive grounds and gardens. Some have even added amusements for the kids and there is at least one wild animal park. The plan for the locals is to bring the family, perhaps a picnic lunch, stay for the day and enjoy the grounds. The fee for this is fairly stiff, but not too bad if you take advantage of the time and facilities. If you are a passing tourist, a couple of these in a day can get quite pricey.
There is usually a fee to get into the grounds and an additional fee to visit the house or castle. I have not seen a "castle only" fee. Some are very good, and others are poor, especially if you don’t have an interest in the details of the family lineage, seeing the family china/silver, etc.. Many of the homes were redecorated in the 20’s and 30’s and have a similar look and feel. A few of these are OK, but they become tiring.
A note to the independent traveler without a car. A number of castles and large estates/homes are in, or within easy reach of major town served by rail. Especially during the summer tourist season, they can be reached by regularly scheduled coach, or coaches dedicated to the attraction. Day or partial day trips are often offered by local tour operators.
Of special note, near Gatewick, Heaver Castle does a good job, especially on weekends. The small castle has its internal buildings in tact and open (most castles only have the stone walls remaining, the wood having rotted away centuries ago). They have an afternoon outdoor program dealing with some medieval subject like archery, jousting, etc. Near Oxford, Blenheim Palace is worth a look. I will comment on some others in an associated document.
Castles were generally built in contested areas or when local families were an endangered species (from raiders, Vikings, etc.). When captured they were wrecked. Only the ruins of many still exits. Wales and Scotland have many of these. Harlech and Caernarfon (my favorite) in Wales, Bamburgh in Northumberland are good examples.
You will often see the time designated on the 24 hour scale. That's where 1 PM is 1300 (13 o'clock), 5 PM is 1700, etc. That ends the AM/PM confusion.
Unfortunately most of the abbeys were wrecked by Henry VIII when he changed the religion. Even the ruins are impressive. Westminster Abbey, London, of course still stands and is worth a guided tour.
Of the standing cathedrals, most all are impressive. Many have a distinguishing feature (tallest spire (Salisbury), longest naive, etc.). There are generally crypts and upstairs areas accessible for a fee. We have found attending an Evensong, especially a sung service, to be an especially rewarding experience (more than a Sunday service). These are usually between 1700 and 1800 hrs. With all the day tourists gone you can usually sit in the fancy choir area, hear the music, the organ and pretend you are a monk at prayers in the 12 century. Even if you are not particularly religious it quite and experience.
The London Underground is a convenient way to get around both Central London, where most of the tourists hang out, and many outlying areas. There are a number of lines, or routes, that cover the area. Each has a name. Get hold of a map showing the famous layout from an information source. Inside the stations there is good signage indication which line you are on, which way the train is going, etc.
You need a ticket or pass to get past the automated entrance gates. Put your pass in the slot. It will be returned to you when the gate is released. Take it with you, and keep it! You will need it to get past the exit gates when you leave.
The name of the ultimate destination, end of the line, of the train is displayed on the lead car, check at it approaches. From your map you can then tell is its going in the direction you want, and if it the correct line. On each station platform are a number of signs indicating the station name. Inside the cars are maps showing the routes so you can tell where you are and how far it is to your destination.
Passes for 3, 4 or 7 consecutive days for (adult) $29, $39 or $59, includes underground, buses and a few local trains. If you can plan it, it may be cheaper to stay outside central London, on or near an underground line and commute. As mentioned elsewhere, there is a Travelodge and an travel inn in Illford (at the end of the M11) very near the Redbridge and Gants Hill stations on the red line.
If you choose to stay further out you will need to ride a commuter train. The fares vary depending on how far you need to ride. The fare also depends on the time of day, with rush hour being most expensive. After 0900 its the best price. As examples, we have stayed near the airport in Ifield, or in Kent near Staplehurst (out in the country). The same day return fare from there is £8, or about $13, and that includes an underground pass for the day.
Closer in, we have stayed at the travel inn in Romford, a long block from the station. Its a true East Enders experience. The fare from there was £4, or about $7 including a tube pass for the day. We had a car and that was about as far in as we wanted to drive. The motel is £38, about $60 some. This would be compared to the central London travel inns at £49, or about $80. Looks like it would be about $70 cheaper for two, using the tube, to stay in Romford for three days.
There is a phenomena in the UK, and other higher latitude countries, that tends to give dark pictures. I think it has two parts. One of these is the "cloudy with bright places" weather common in the UK. This produces a situation in which most everything is a scene is essentially a "cloudy" day from a lighting standpoint. Here and there will be the brightly illuminated sides of clouds visible through small, clear areas. What you see is the sides of the clouds, not blue sky, and the reflected light does little to illuminate the ground.
The other contributing factor is the latitude. The sun tends to shine more directly (lower angle) on the (essentially vertical) sides of clouds than we are used to in the North Central states. The combination of these effects makes for very bright areas in the sky part of your picture that tend to trick the light metering system in your camera into thinking its much brighter that the area around your subjects (generally on the ground) actually is. The result is an underexposed picture. Wide angle lenses tend to exacerbate the situation by including a lot of sky in pictures.
Realizing the potential problem, use of a few conventional techniques can help. If you use a wide-angle lens, compose pictures so only a minimal amount of sky is included; point the camera down more than you would ordinarily (usually you get half sky with nothing very interesting in that area anyway). If you can, take a light reading from the subject, and retain it while composing your picture; the bright sky areas will be overexposed, but the subject will be much better. Finally, be aware of the part of the picture your camera uses to determine the light reading; a center-weighted (80% or better) metering system works much better.
The clouds and long evenings with soft sunlight at low angles provide interesting photo-ops.
This discussion is associated with some frustrating aspects of travel everywhere, not just the UK. While I think we retain a sense of humor at most times, the situation, nevertheless, makes for some factious ways to look at things. With that in mind . . . .
As with the roads, there are a lot of useful signs around the UK in general. As a stranger it is useful to have directions and information readily available. As you experience the UK you may note many of the signs also include, or imply, the reasoning behind the direction or restriction being displayed on the sign. (Here comes the factious part) In some cases this explanation seems sufficiently detailed to relate to rights granted, or restrictions imposed, by royalty in the 1200’s or by the Magna Carta. Without much of a history, the traveler from the North Central states might wonder the relevance of such information as it applies to the situation at hand. In any case, reading the signs is worth the time just to see their wording and content. It may provide information about the culture in general, certainly about the bureaucracy providing the signs.
A bit of a side track here, dimly related. There was a quote from "a London newspaper in 1906" in an article about Chess (so you understand the content of the quote) in the January, 1998 "Smithsonian" magazine. "It will be cheering to know that many persons are skilled chess-players, although in many instances their brains, in a general way, compare unfavorably to the cogitative faculties of a rabbit." If you look at the attitude, humor, and wording of this quote, you may gain some insight into the UK culture. I think the spelling was changed to be American English. The person who wrote this must have moonlighted writing signs.
There is an interaction between the people who write the signs and the people who read them. There is an aspect of the chicken-and-egg theorem here and probably a historical context. Do the sign writers respond to a need the readers have to be told what to do in infinite detail, or do the readers respond to the sign writers by not doing anything unless they have explicit signed instructions?
When traveling in a place that has so many unique and interesting things to see one tends to be frustrated when confronted with the amount of time and energy they require just to deal with food, lodging, etc. An amount of these resources are expended coexisting with others, local travelers, distant travelers and those who are just trying to go about their daily activities. This would include seniors, just like one’s parents, for whom things don’t happen quickly or easily. While trying not to be hyper about things, and in spite of trying to make allowances for these effects, and the population density, one tends to make some observations.
One of these that proves to be maddening has to do with the degree to which people seem oblivious to their surroundings. Whether its motivated by a protection mechanism to deal with the density of the people, by a desire to demonstrate independence or assert a right, or simple a lack of ability to comprehend the situation I have not been able to determine. While being friendly and helpful on one hand, there seems to be an inordinate disregard by individuals to act in a manner that takes into account their effect on their fellow persons on the other hand. This manifests itself in various ways including groups conversing while blocking crowded and narrow side walks, pedestrians crossing streets seemingly oblivious to traffic (and their own safety), and their apparent inability to function independently without external direction (signs) of some sort.
I can’t pretend to be objective about the situation. See what you think as you go about learning and participating in the UK culture.
The UK is a very crowded place in many areas. Most all the land is privately owned. Still, historical legacy has provided a means to be able to enjoy a walk in the country, actually better than in our vast open spaces. Landowners are required to maintain designated ways through their land. The user of these ways should recognize that they are on private land and take care to not disturb crops and livestock as they pass through, not litter and not damage fences, walls and the like.
There are several categories of these ways. Depending on the designation, the landowner must provide a way with sufficient clearence and means to pass through or over fences, walls, hedges and other barriers. The most common of these is the "Public Footpath" which allows passage of a walker. Look for signs indicating where these footpaths are located. They are all over.
There are also public bridal paths (large enough for a horse and rider) and public carriageways (big enough for horses and carriage) but these are less numerous.
You will probably notice there is a lot of stone used in the buildings. There is lots of stone available, and few trees for lumber. Any trees that did exist were used up to build the fleet of ships that made England a major sea power a long time ago. This lumber was recycled into the supporting timbers and floors in buildings. In buildings of sufficient age you can spot them by the extraneous notches and holes left over from their sea duty.
Older buildings have thick stone walls. While this makes for interesting places to store inside window shutters, it also creates problems in routing plumbing and heating, features which these buildings did not have when they were constructed. Its really hard to make holes in 3 foot thick stone walls. Its also hard to warm them up and cool them down. They are also very sound and fire proof.
What you find is a lot of surface plumbing work. The toilets tend to be on the outside walls and discharge out the back. In this way the main sewer line can be on the outside and the 4" line only needs to pass through one wall. With little really cold weather they don’t freeze. Lavatories (sinks) are more readily mounted on inside walls needing only small supply lines and a 1 1/4 inch drain line.
These older houses were originally heated with fireplaces. As you will note, being narrow and deep, they were designed to burn coal. Here we have wider fireplaces intended to burn wood. Most fireplaces have been covered over, are hidden behind a decorative screen or have a bunch of dried flowers in them. For those still using them for a source of heat, either a gas or electric heater (the "Electric Fire") placed in front.
Because of the difficulty of heating all the stone, and with a climate that is almost tolerable without any heat, the folks in the UK (and Europe) make much better use of radiant heat than we do in the North Central States. Rather than heating air and blowing it around, radiant heat warms the objects in the room (people included). Energy is expensive and areas around the house tend not to be heated unless in use. Radiant heat, similar to that produced by quartz heaters or an open fire, has an instant effect when turned on making it responsive to need.
When the Romans occupied England they had central heat in their buildings (at least some). The English forgot about that until relatively recently. To retrofit building with thick stone walls, hot water/steam heat is about the only practical solution. The energy is supplied through small pipes which only need small holes in the walls. What you will see are "radiators" shaped like flat panels so they actually radiate head into a space rather than heat the air like our old style radiators and baseboard heaters. They are very effective.
Other useful adaptations are bathroom towel bars that are electrically heated (or with hot water) to dry the towels and heated bathroom floors.
Roof materials for houses include actual slates (thin, flat stones) and tiles of various types. Its a very wet climate and roofs of this type, although expensive, last a long time (much longer than the 15-20 years a shigles roof lasts here). If you think you are in it for the long haul its worth the money.
Newer homes still use stone, in the form of cement blocks, as their structural support. The outside may be brick or stone. Brick exteriors here are decrative, being placed over wood structures. Interiors are studs and sheetrock.
Additional information on aspects of buildings and houses pertinent to using their facilities appears at the end of the Lodging section.
Toilet facilities, or the watercloset, or just the WC, are usually easy to find. Its not uncommon for folks to be out for periods long enough to need to use a rest room and you won't be the first person to need one. The motorways have rest areas, there are pubs, department stores, fast food places, etc. Towns of any size will usually have "public facilities" located in a convenient place (by the car park, in a park near the shops, etc.) and these will range from outstanding to marginal. There is no need to use the French approach of just stopping along the road and having a whiz.
For those with limited mobility, especially climbing stairs, take note or inquire about the facilities you may be counting on in a restaurant. These can often be in the basement or up (several flights) stairs. Some on the main level can be in obscure (like outside) places. Be sure you can get to them if needed.