Why are children using the tube on field trips?

[Specialapplek]

Very often in London I see big groups of young children (and teens as well) being accompanied by their teachers on the tube. Presumably they are on school trips.

Why don't they charter a bus though? When I was in school we always hired a bus for our trips to the museums, zoo, etc. We could sit with our friends and sing songs and play games. Why would anyone choose to transport a big group of children on the tube? No one gets to sit down, the teachers have to constantly watch out for kids falling over, wandering off...

I'm genuinely curious so could anyone weigh in? As a parent I think I'd prefer my children being transported in a private hire bus, unless travelling on the tube is part of the purpose of the whole excursion.

The cost of hiring a bus, and the relevant insurance, is HUGE. It would make an educational trip out of financial reach for thousands of children, if added to the cost of a trip.

Because coaches cost a fortune and central London is easier and quicker to get round on public transport.

Because it's quicker to get round London on the tube.

It's free for the kids, isn't it?

It depends where they go to school. If it is a straightforward tube journey (so a few stops, no changes) then getting the tube will be loads cheaper than hiring a bus (which I'm told is extortionate). Children who live right in the centre of London will be familiar with getting the tube regularly.

because hiring coaches for the day is pretty expensive - (min £600)

Children travel for free on the tube.

Also, the tube works better than the bus for many journeys, that's why it isn't empty all the time.

I don't live in London but here most schools use the metro,it is a lot cheaper just £1.20

School trips in London have always used the tube. We did 30+ years ago. It's cheap, quick and the DC love it. It's the poor staff who have to take the strain.

Even 11-18 year olds get free travel in groups from London schools apparently;

tfl.gov.uk/fares-and-payments/travel-for-under-18s/school-parties#on-this-page-1

Because hiring coaches is prohibitively expensive. Simple answer.

Why don't they charter a bus though? When I was in school we always hired a bus for our trips to the museums, zoo, etc.

Are you kidding? Are you really that dim?

1. Cost 2) um, its London... have you SEEN the roads? 3) easier 4) environment

Couple of minutes on the tube vs being stuck in London traffic for ages i guess? The only time I went to London on a trip at school we were outnumbered by teachers! 4 pupils (it was a tiny school in a remote northern Scotland!) and 5teachers who I think just wanted to visit London! So we went on the tube, but can imagine it's can get a bit chaotic though when it's normal class sizes, but part of the learning experience, trying out London transport.

Yep... Tube links up to everywhere; is free for children; will be familiar to most children in London. Getting a bus in London would mean spending the whole day on the bus; the traffic is awful.

They are pretty good at avoiding commuter times, usually, so it's logical to use the free, easy transport option.

I went to school up north, and we used the tube on school trips to London.

If they got a coach, all they'd ever see is traffic!!

Money. It was about £800 to hire a coach, then you have to find parking, etc. Tube is free for school groups, and often much more direct to famous sights, etc.

Because it's free and coaches cost a huge amount off money to hire for the day in sw London it's around the £750 mark.

Because the roads are massively congested and the children will get travel sick!

(Also the time and expense everyone else noted.)

Tube is much much quicker than using a coach. On a coach going to the major attractions the children would spend all day on the coach and not get to anything.

Mys if they continue to live in london it then becomes a life skill level f reading maps, knowing stops. As opposed to the protected bubble of a coach. We live outside london but rather than use a coach our school quite often uses the overland train.

Environmental reasons, as mentioned above should be a consideration- why run an extra vehicle if there is already public transport available? I would consider this a valuable learning experience in its own right.

Did you grow up in London, OP? We always used the tube for school trips 15-20 years ago too.

Obviously makes sense for the cost/traffic reasons mentioned by everyone else above.

Cost reasons, timing reasons (traffic can be terrible in London so getting anywhere would take ages). But also, it is a good learning experience for children many of whom (at least the little ones) have never taken the tube before or possibly even used an escalator.

DD's school often travels this way and a trip to London requires a change of overland train and possibly a change of tube depending where they are going. It is exhausting for adults and children but the children love it.

I guess it's because personally I don't like travelling on the tube that's why I wonder why large groups would choose to use it! If given a choice I'd always take the bus or a cab.

The cost part didn't occur to me as well as we never had to pay for the private bus on our trips. Times were different!

I can't add much more than others have, but 'teachers have to constantly watch out for kids falling over, wandering off..." Really?

It is pretty bloody difficult to 'wander off' on the tube, what with the closed doors and metal walls. I'm pretty sure teachers aren't 'constantly' doing it at all.
Big groups will get help from the station staff the tube stations where they get on and off. The platform staff will make sure everyone is safely on or off before they give the signal to the drivers to close the doors, and will advise which carriage they get on to make it easy for everyone to line up along the wall.

But obviously your snowflakes need to be 'privately transported' to avoid all the imaginary hazards and be able to sing songs