The Reid wrote:
> Following up to Jack Campin - bogus address
>
> >> Not as exciting as the train for an American, but one can enjoy the
> >> scenery and fares are substantially cheaper than the train.
> >> Glasgow >> 8.40 minutes (not so attractive!).
> >
> >Raed "you would have to be out of your tiny mind to even consider it
> >if you had any other option".
> >
> >I've done the bus between Edinburgh or Glasgow and London several
> >times. All you'll see for most of the trip is motorway embankments.
>
> while I'm the most anti bus person round here, nearly all of the
> Scotland/London motorway routes you can see the countryside,
> (especially from a bus) however, the M1 south from Birmingham
> goes through a lot of dull countryside and of course major roads
> usually avoid the best countryside.
> --
I can only think of two reasonably scenic motorways in Britain- the M6
through the Lake District and the M62 between Manchester and Leeds. Odd
bits of the M4 and M5 are okay as well I suppose. Most others you see
plenty of fields of cows etc but not much in the way of hills,
mountains or wilderness. Some are just excruciatingly dull: the whole
of the M1 is utter tedium and most of the M40 is like an overdose of
Valium.
Presumably London-Glasgow will do that bit of the M6, whilst to
Edinburgh you'll have the M1 plus the equally mind-numbing A1 to
finish. The thing is, the railways will often follow the same routes,
certainly the London/Edinburgh line parallels the A1 much of the time.
Edmund
|